417 réponses à ce sujet

[Tatinger]

I'd love to hear what Ron Clement has to say on the issue. It might elucidate matters considerably.

[Phoenixblight]

Anathemic wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Mecha Tengu wrote...
I think it is because RTS have compeitive multiplayer, and will be played on a general, daily-weekly basis. Single player RPGs are played once, then a few more playthroughs every week or so.

There is more incentive to patch up and balance an RTS, than a single player RPG that can truly be enjoyed once.
Why spend money patching up DAO when Bioware could be spending on DA2 development and DLC

Exactly, so RPGs are more easier and not as code-heavy and stressing to patch as RTSs are.

That conclusion doesn't at all follow from what you're replying to. It's also untrue.

Back it up, I can:

StarCraft Patches

Dragon Age: Origins Patches

Looks like Starcraft the RTS has not only more but heavily extensive patches than DA:O the RPG does

Xbox 360 has a limit on how big patches can be where a PC exclusive game does not have that limit. 


Blizzard games =/= Multiplatform games. 

[Anathemic]

Phoenixblight wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Mecha Tengu wrote...
I think it is because RTS have compeitive multiplayer, and will be played on a general, daily-weekly basis. Single player RPGs are played once, then a few more playthroughs every week or so.

There is more incentive to patch up and balance an RTS, than a single player RPG that can truly be enjoyed once.
Why spend money patching up DAO when Bioware could be spending on DA2 development and DLC

Exactly, so RPGs are more easier and not as code-heavy and stressing to patch as RTSs are.

That conclusion doesn't at all follow from what you're replying to. It's also untrue.

Back it up, I can:

StarCraft Patches

Dragon Age: Origins Patches

Looks like Starcraft the RTS has not only more but heavily extensive patches than DA:O the RPG does

Xbox 360 has a limit on how big patches can be where a PC exclusive game does not have that limit. 


Blizzard games =/= Multiplatform games. 

Bungie never had a probelm with being on console

[ErichHartmann]

Anathemic wrote...

Phoenixblight wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Mecha Tengu wrote...
I think it is because RTS have compeitive multiplayer, and will be played on a general, daily-weekly basis. Single player RPGs are played once, then a few more playthroughs every week or so.

There is more incentive to patch up and balance an RTS, than a single player RPG that can truly be enjoyed once.
Why spend money patching up DAO when Bioware could be spending on DA2 development and DLC

Exactly, so RPGs are more easier and not as code-heavy and stressing to patch as RTSs are.

That conclusion doesn't at all follow from what you're replying to. It's also untrue.

Back it up, I can:

StarCraft Patches

Dragon Age: Origins Patches

Looks like Starcraft the RTS has not only more but heavily extensive patches than DA:O the RPG does

Xbox 360 has a limit on how big patches can be where a PC exclusive game does not have that limit. 


Blizzard games =/= Multiplatform games. 

Bungie never had a probelm with being on console

And your point is?

[Anathemic]

ErichHartmann wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Phoenixblight wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Mecha Tengu wrote...
I think it is because RTS have compeitive multiplayer, and will be played on a general, daily-weekly basis. Single player RPGs are played once, then a few more playthroughs every week or so.

There is more incentive to patch up and balance an RTS, than a single player RPG that can truly be enjoyed once.
Why spend money patching up DAO when Bioware could be spending on DA2 development and DLC

Exactly, so RPGs are more easier and not as code-heavy and stressing to patch as RTSs are.

That conclusion doesn't at all follow from what you're replying to. It's also untrue.

Back it up, I can:

StarCraft Patches

Dragon Age: Origins Patches

Looks like Starcraft the RTS has not only more but heavily extensive patches than DA:O the RPG does

Xbox 360 has a limit on how big patches can be where a PC exclusive game does not have that limit. 


Blizzard games =/= Multiplatform games. 

Bungie never had a probelm with being on console

And your point is?

Halo: CE Patches

Point is he brought up that being on the console was a delay in the patching-process, which it is but I countered than Bungie with ther Halo series (linked above) didn't have a problem with deliving a good patching-process to their community.

And this was brought up because as DA:O had many many bugy and very very few patches which didn't really help, other games and their developers were brought in to show that this patching-process can indeed be done.

[Phoenixblight]

Anathemic wrote...

ErichHartmann wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Phoenixblight wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Mecha Tengu wrote...
I think it is because RTS have compeitive multiplayer, and will be played on a general, daily-weekly basis. Single player RPGs are played once, then a few more playthroughs every week or so.

There is more incentive to patch up and balance an RTS, than a single player RPG that can truly be enjoyed once.
Why spend money patching up DAO when Bioware could be spending on DA2 development and DLC

Exactly, so RPGs are more easier and not as code-heavy and stressing to patch as RTSs are.

That conclusion doesn't at all follow from what you're replying to. It's also untrue.

Back it up, I can:

StarCraft Patches

Dragon Age: Origins Patches

Looks like Starcraft the RTS has not only more but heavily extensive patches than DA:O the RPG does

Xbox 360 has a limit on how big patches can be where a PC exclusive game does not have that limit. 


Blizzard games =/= Multiplatform games. 

Bungie never had a probelm with being on console

And your point is?

Halo: CE Patches

Point is he brought up that being on the console was a delay in the patching-process, which it is but I countered than Bungie with ther Halo series (linked above) didn't have a problem with deliving a good patching-process to their community.

And this was brought up because as DA:O had many many bugy and very very few patches which didn't really help, other games and their developers were brought in to show that this patching-process can indeed be done.

Edit: Nice you linked the patches to PC version of Halo. That is not the same patches for the Xbox.  ANd the Xbox had a huge Hard drive where the 360 has a arcade version and because of that arcade version they have to limit the size of patches. 

Modifié par Phoenixblight, 11 septembre 2010 - 04:57 .

[Meltemph]

And this was brought up because as DA:O had many many bugy and very very few patches which didn't really help, other games and their developers were brought in to show that this patching-process can indeed be done.

I agree, and from where I am sitting and from what all I have to work on is observation of said system...  is that it is broke.  However, I know EA has to play a fairly large role in quality assurance, so I can only assume that its brokenness starts at the top. I understand monetary limitations, and I also understand things are never as simple as they seem, but they type of bugs that are represented in DA:O and DA:A are simply way to interfering in ones game to be simply put as "missed bugs that got by".

I do not think it is unreasonable to expect Bioware or EA whoever is mainly in-charge of QA to step-up their game. Whether the problems are inherent in the engine or whatever, while understandable, should not be as prevalent, imo as they are. It is not that there are tons of bugs in DAO...quite the contrary, imo, it is that a lot of the bugs known about by the community are very much a thorn that one simply can not move around, but must rely on work-around's that quite frankly should not exists.

Modifié par Meltemph, 11 septembre 2010 - 05:02 .

[Anathemic]

Phoenixblight wrote...
Edit: Nice you linked the patches to PC version of Halo. That is not the same patches for the Xbox.  ANd the Xbox had a huge Hard drive where the 360 has a arcade version and because of that arcade version they have to limit the size of patches. 

XD seems that I did, ty, here the list of Halo 2 patches on XBox (as I can't find Halo CE XBox patches)

Halo 2 Patches

Still more extensive than DA:O Patches

Edit: The Halo 3 Patches

Modifié par Anathemic, 11 septembre 2010 - 05:05 .

[Phoenixblight]

Anathemic wrote...

Phoenixblight wrote...
Edit: Nice you linked the patches to PC version of Halo. That is not the same patches for the Xbox.  ANd the Xbox had a huge Hard drive where the 360 has a arcade version and because of that arcade version they have to limit the size of patches. 

XD seems that I did, ty, here the list of Halo 2 patches on XBox (as I can't find Halo CE XBox patches)

Halo 2 Patches

Still more extensive than DA:O Patches

Edit: The Halo 3 Patches

Uh DAO were more intensive than that. 
http://social.biowar...page/da-patches






And as Bioware has stated some things can't be fixed because it may actually break the game. Where as DA2 they can start from the ground up and fix the bugs and not worry if it will make X% of their consumers game broken. 

[Anathemic]

Phoenixblight wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Phoenixblight wrote...
Edit: Nice you linked the patches to PC version of Halo. That is not the same patches for the Xbox.  ANd the Xbox had a huge Hard drive where the 360 has a arcade version and because of that arcade version they have to limit the size of patches. 

XD seems that I did, ty, here the list of Halo 2 patches on XBox (as I can't find Halo CE XBox patches)

Halo 2 Patches

Still more extensive than DA:O Patches

Edit: The Halo 3 Patches

Uh DAO were more intensive than that. 
http://social.biowar...page/da-patches






And as Bioware has stated some things can't be fixed because it may actually break the game. Where as DA2 they can start from the ground up and fix the bugs and not worry if it will make X% of their consumers game broken. 

Once 1.03 came out, DA:O went chaotic, console were screwed beyond redemption and PC suffered too, extensive yes, fixing, no.

[Maverick827]

Phoenixblight wrote...

And as Bioware has stated some things can't be fixed because it may actually break the game. Where as DA2 they can start from the ground up and fix the bugs and not worry if it will make X% of their consumers game broken. 

The largest, most intrusive bugs can certainly be fixed.  They currently are in player mods.  Why not take a day, compile said mods, and release them as an official patch?

[Phoenixblight]

Maverick827 wrote...

Phoenixblight wrote...

And as Bioware has stated some things can't be fixed because it may actually break the game. Where as DA2 they can start from the ground up and fix the bugs and not worry if it will make X% of their consumers game broken. 

The largest, most intrusive bugs can certainly be fixed.  They currently are in player mods.  Why not take a day, compile said mods, and release them as an official patch?

Comes back to Xbox360 having limit patch size and since I have good amount of those mods they are much bigger than the restriction. If I remember correctly it can only be 100-200MB

[Anathemic]

Phoenixblight wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...

Phoenixblight wrote...

And as Bioware has stated some things can't be fixed because it may actually break the game. Where as DA2 they can start from the ground up and fix the bugs and not worry if it will make X% of their consumers game broken. 

The largest, most intrusive bugs can certainly be fixed.  They currently are in player mods.  Why not take a day, compile said mods, and release them as an official patch?

Comes back to Xbox360 having limit patch size and since I have good amount of those mods they are much bigger than the restriction. If I remember correctly it can only be 100-200MB

Then put it through multiple small patches? I don't see money being a big issue here as TOR is going to come out soon and as you said the upcoming ME3

[Saibh]

Maverick827 wrote...

Phoenixblight wrote...

And as Bioware has stated some things can't be fixed because it may actually break the game. Where as DA2 they can start from the ground up and fix the bugs and not worry if it will make X% of their consumers game broken. 

The largest, most intrusive bugs can certainly be fixed.  They currently are in player mods.  Why not take a day, compile said mods, and release them as an official patch?

Indeed. If they try to say some of the large bugs will break the game, well, they haven't come across any mods. People fixed them and they work fine. It seems to me a lot of bugs have to do with this-or-that plot flag not being raised properly, which is an easy fix.

[saruman31]

DAO is a singe player game. Im even surprised they released patches.

[MerrickShep]

Blastback wrote...

This is definatly my biggest concern. Espesially in light of the fact that some bugs like the ones causeing Vigilence and the Armor of the Sentinal have been hinted at being unfixable for consoles. How the heck could anyone miss that those two didn't look right on consoles anyway?

Bullcrap all I have to say.

I'm sure DA2 will have plenty of bugs because Bioware will probably rush it to meet a deadline they shouldnt' have set. If the date gets pushed back I will be happy because that mean they are gonna put some more effort in getting rid of all the bugs they possibly can.

[Blastback]

RyuAzai wrote...

I had no idea there were bugs in Witch Hunt. I played through it with no problem what so ever.

I even unlocked some achievements, and I had for my laptop.

I am curious what bugs have people been facing?

It's a big one at the end.  A lot of people are finding that if their warden performed the Dark Ritual with Morrigan, she will act as if they didn't.

[oenis]

Meltemph wrote...

I agree, and from where I am sitting and from what all I have to work on is observation of said system...  is that it is broke.  However, I know EA has to play a fairly large role in quality assurance, so I can only assume that its brokenness starts at the top. I understand monetary limitations, and I also understand things are never as simple as they seem, but they type of bugs that are represented in DA:O and DA:A are simply way to interfering in ones game to be simply put as "missed bugs that got by".

I do not think it is unreasonable to expect Bioware or EA whoever is mainly in-charge of QA to step-up their game. Whether the problems are inherent in the engine or whatever, while understandable, should not be as prevalent, imo as they are. It is not that there are tons of bugs in DAO...quite the contrary, imo, it is that a lot of the bugs known about by the community are very much a thorn that one simply can not move around, but must rely on work-around's that quite frankly should not exists.

Sorry to be OT, but has anyone played the Sims 3? HOLY COW those are some buggy games. And I'm talking game breaking, like constant crashes, losing all your saves, people getting stuck in places forever. The original sims had like no bugs, as far as I can remember. The Sims 3 is just whew, incredibly broken. Not to mention that they take forever to patch huge issues and charge $1 for each addition DLC item.

[Vandicus]

Blastback wrote...

RyuAzai wrote...

I had no idea there were bugs in Witch Hunt. I played through it with no problem what so ever.

I even unlocked some achievements, and I had for my laptop.

I am curious what bugs have people been facing?

It's a big one at the end.  A lot of people are finding that if their warden performed the Dark Ritual with Morrigan, she will act as if they didn't.

Luckily, they say they're releasing a PC patch for it on Monday that apears to work. All my Wardens do the Dark Ritual, so I'm still waiting on that reaction.

As for DA:O bugs, the only issues I've had were a couple crashes, and my computer crashes on virtually every computer game at some point. Haven't had any issues with DA:A yet. Guess I'm just lucky.

[Wishpig]

Saibh wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...

Phoenixblight wrote...

And as Bioware has stated some things can't be fixed because it may actually break the game. Where as DA2 they can start from the ground up and fix the bugs and not worry if it will make X% of their consumers game broken. 

The largest, most intrusive bugs can certainly be fixed.  They currently are in player mods.  Why not take a day, compile said mods, and release them as an official patch?

Indeed. If they try to say some of the large bugs will break the game, well, they haven't come across any mods. People fixed them and they work fine. It seems to me a lot of bugs have to do with this-or-that plot flag not being raised properly, which is an easy fix.

The devs actually responded to this line of thinking. Pretty much saying that the devs have to be very very very very carefull when going around fixing up bugs. The modders have more freedom to tinker around and tidy things up without the risk the devs have. The modders also have more time and can focus on fewer things at once.

Hey, I don't get it... seems like they could just do what you said. BUT I'm no programmer, so I'm gonna have to take the devs word.

[Anathemic]

Wishpig wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...

Phoenixblight wrote...

And as Bioware has stated some things can't be fixed because it may actually break the game. Where as DA2 they can start from the ground up and fix the bugs and not worry if it will make X% of their consumers game broken. 

The largest, most intrusive bugs can certainly be fixed.  They currently are in player mods.  Why not take a day, compile said mods, and release them as an official patch?

Indeed. If they try to say some of the large bugs will break the game, well, they haven't come across any mods. People fixed them and they work fine. It seems to me a lot of bugs have to do with this-or-that plot flag not being raised properly, which is an easy fix.

The devs actually responded to this line of thinking. Pretty much saying that the devs have to be very very very very carefull when going around fixing up bugs. The modders have more freedom to tinker around and tidy things up without the risk the devs have. The modders also have more time and can focus on fewer things at once.

Hey, I don't get it... seems like they could just do what you said. BUT I'm no programmer, so I'm gonna have to take the devs word.

Well here's a simple idea, buy the game, tinker with it without reprucussions, just like a modder, WOAH!!!

No that's too insane, too much work for devs, the only work used is at work. Well if you go on that philosophy then BioWare is way below Blizzard, CDProjekt, Nintendo, Valve, basically every single major game company's standards.

[Wishpig]

Anathemic wrote...

Wishpig wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...

Phoenixblight wrote...

And as Bioware has stated some things can't be fixed because it may actually break the game. Where as DA2 they can start from the ground up and fix the bugs and not worry if it will make X% of their consumers game broken. 

The largest, most intrusive bugs can certainly be fixed.  They currently are in player mods.  Why not take a day, compile said mods, and release them as an official patch?

Indeed. If they try to say some of the large bugs will break the game, well, they haven't come across any mods. People fixed them and they work fine. It seems to me a lot of bugs have to do with this-or-that plot flag not being raised properly, which is an easy fix.

The devs actually responded to this line of thinking. Pretty much saying that the devs have to be very very very very carefull when going around fixing up bugs. The modders have more freedom to tinker around and tidy things up without the risk the devs have. The modders also have more time and can focus on fewer things at once.

Hey, I don't get it... seems like they could just do what you said. BUT I'm no programmer, so I'm gonna have to take the devs word.

Well here's a simple idea, buy the game, tinker with it without reprucussions, just like a modder, WOAH!!!

No that's too insane, too much work for devs, the only work used is at work. Well if you go on that philosophy then BioWare is way below Blizzard, CDProjekt, Nintendo, Valve, basically every single major game company's standards.

Hey, like I said... I don't get it. But I guess I really have no room to argue as I have no idea what goes into it. Especially spanning 3 systems.

Modifié par Wishpig, 11 septembre 2010 - 07:11 .

[snfonseka]

Saibh wrote...

Pretty much. Some of the bugs are pretty sickening, and seem outright silly, as if they never even bothered to play. What, no one in your company bothered to not make Alistair king?

Agreed..........

[Maverick827]

Wishpig wrote...

Hey, like I said... I don't get it. But I guess I really have no room to argue as I have no idea what goes into it. Especially spanning 3 systems.

Very early on in the thread I posted some code snippets and (hopefully) plainly explained why they didn't work, and how they amounted to mere typos and would absolutely not break anything if fixed.

[Anathemic]

I've been looking over Phoenixblight's quotes and him mentioning Casey Hudson alot, well I did some research into Casey Hudson, and well, she's an outright liar:



http://www.thegamera...-1000-decisions



"Q: You said that the development team was able to track 700 choices from Mass Effect and incorporate them into Mass Effect 2. And, you plan to have more than 1,000 decisions tracked for Mass Effect 3. Why?



A: When you think about hundreds of choices, your selection is going make your experience different from somebody else's. And we try to think of those scenarios as water cooler moments. We want something interesting to come out it. Then you realize that the experience you're getting is customized to the game you're playing."



700 choices implemented from ME1 to ME2? Really? Yeah right



"Q: Mass Effect 2 allows Commander Shepard to connect with his crewmates by helping them with very personal missions. It felt like you wanted the gamer to connect as well. What did you envision the result would be?



A: Now, that's not just a character. That's Miranda, who 10 minutes ago you helped make up with her sister. Now it's somebody that you know and care about that is in trouble."



Wtf, Miranda? Miranda was an ass, I never connected with her