344 réponses à ce sujet

[Inarai]

Seifz wrote...

Ruben Thomas wrote...

knacki99 wrote...

Hm I know that console updates need certification but PC patches only do when the games are under the "Games for Windows" moniker from MS. So why do you hold the PC patch back when it is basically ready?

Like Chris Priestly said, EA QA (quality assurance).

Seriously?  EA still has a QA team?  How do they manage to miss the gigantic bugs that they miss in every single release?!  I'm talking about things like the borked endings in DA:O, the instant +100 Love companion bug in Awakening, etc.  There's no way in hell that a QA team could miss these things.

QA catches bugs, but they're not responsible for fixing them.  That's someone else's job, and a decision has to be made whether or not to fix the issue - generally, balancing the severity of the bug against the time remaining to fix it against the risks of pushing the title back (if that's even an option in the first place, and I've found with EA it rarely if ever is), which can get to be a very interesting balance as you get closer and closer to having to send it off to get it onto discs and then shelves on time - what gets tricky is that fixing one bug can create 3 more.  Day 1 patches are generally a case of getting as many fixes as possible ready between sending the game off for mastering and actual launch.

I know most people like to thing that if you need more time, you just take it, but sometimes it just doesn't work that way, especially if you have to go to a publisher and ask - taking the decision out of the hands of developers is going to cause some rather poor decisions, which I've seen from EA in the past.  It's not the first time I've seen a game with their name on it forced out onto market ~6 months early - if everyone involved is lucky, the devs can get it fixed within a month or two, while the game's still semi-current.  Otherwise, it likely won't be any good for maybe that full 6 months, at which point the title is just straight up dead.

Wish people would get an idea of what they're talking about before leaping to lay blame.

[knacki99]

If EA had a QA Team the "patch is going to be big. (Luke Barret)" would not be needed. Actually I wonder why this was not addressed before release. Anyhow there is no certification need from MS or Sony and no cross platform functionality.

So there is no real reason to hold the PC Update back.

[Inarai]

knacki99 wrote...

If EA had a QA Team the "patch is going to be big. (Luke Barret)" would not be needed. Actually I wonder why this was not addressed before release. Anyhow there is no certification need from MS or Sony and no cross platform functionality.

So there is no real reason to hold the PC Update back.

First, can people drop the false premise that having QA is a magic cure for bugs and that a patch wouldn't be needed?  Programs get released with known issues all the time in order to make deadlines.  DA2's readme file lists known issues, which probably didn't get fixed due to deadlines.

Therefore, your argument fails, but even if it didn't commit seppuku there, there's this little nugget: If EA has a certification process, which is possible as an internal policy, it would expand the timeline.  Ergo, your second statement is quite fully invalid as well.

[knacki99]

Then DA2 deadlines were too short in the first place.

[Talogrungi]

Yay for patch!

Here's hoping that one of the fixes is for the Isabella Thumbs Up bug! .. I hate leaving the saucy minx out of the party.

[Fredvdp]

Good news. perhaps now I can be friendly with Sebastian and Isabela without going into Zack Snyder mode. There's always the save editor of course, but that's not the ideal solution.

[Inarai]

knacki99 wrote...

Then DA2 deadlines were too short in the first place.

Certainly true, but I would suggest it's more reasonable for the moment to focus on present problems that can be fixed?  Can't exactly go back in tiem and change that fact, but it's very possible for Bioware to patch the game - and they are doing so.  Pointing out the fact that the development window was clearly too short doesn't exactly add anything to the discussion given that I already alluded to precisely that fact.

That said, deadlines being too short aren't the only reason  you can get a bugged release.  An extra 6 months of work wouldn't have been an extra 6 months of testing, it would have been more stuff added and more room for bugs.  Testing is a fairly constant thing on some scale, mind you, but if you try to set deadlines in stone you're setting yourself up for a lot of trouble no matter the timeframe you're working with.  Longer timeframes are just an excuse to do more.

[Taura-Tierno]

Seifz wrote...

Ruben Thomas wrote...

knacki99 wrote...

Hm I know that console updates need certification but PC patches only do when the games are under the "Games for Windows" moniker from MS. So why do you hold the PC patch back when it is basically ready?

Like Chris Priestly said, EA QA (quality assurance).

Seriously?  EA still has a QA team?  How do they manage to miss the gigantic bugs that they miss in every single release?!  I'm talking about things like the borked endings in DA:O, the instant +100 Love companion bug in Awakening, etc.  There's no way in hell that a QA team could miss these things.

It usually isn't up to a QA team to decide what to fix. Testers, for instance, don't fix bugs. They find bugs, nothing else (generally speaking). That bugs exist does not mean that testers and other QA folks didn't do their jobs. It could mean that, but there is no way to know.

[badboy64]

Can't wait until the next patch comes out.

[knacki99]

Ah well no more reasoning please. It is a given fact that DA2 production quality is below Bioware standards and that is due to a rushed release by the publisher. That is also reason why there is level recycling in the game and a lot of bugs.

Now I actually do not believe that testing a patch, regardless of its size, does include whole playthrough sessions by any QA departement or certification crew at MS, Sony, EA or Bioware.

Working on a patch is all nice and good but the game is on sale for like 5 weeks now? The most bugs probably were known even before release. Otherwise a patch this big for 3 platforms could not be ready in this "short" amount of time.

I criticize the release and development behaviour, not the need to patch the game. 'nough said.

[Perzyn2]

Well, if the patch is fixing ~100 issues than we are talking about one seriously bugged game here.

Sure, some of these are pretty minor probably, but nontheless... One hundred issues is a lot. Some can slip through QA, some are minor enough to be ignored before release with "We'll patch them eventually" attitude. But not in such numbers...

[Woodstock-TC]

sounds cool ! hope the QA works extra shifts to roll it out soon, nah ASAP

[Siri_tachi]

News on a patch, thats manna to my ears!

Well I for one hope the patch makes the game playable,I pre ordered, waited eargerly then I installed a game which even on the lowest settings crashes so frequently that it makes playing it impossible. ( yes I do meet and exceed the required specs;))

I'm a big fan of Bioware games, the care and attention they put into the story and characters especially. So if I have to wait a little longer, that's fine with me because it's better to take time and get it right than rush it out and get it wrong..... again.

Perhaps next time though, they need to ensure more rigerous testing before release? ;-)

[Antonius66]

Well hopefully soon, as I am waiting to play this.  Was working on other stuff so i didn't start playing it when I got it, and at this point, would like to just wait for the 1.02 patch to start.

[AxellSlade]

Seriously, you guys should simply release a toolset and let the community do the fixing. That would work for PC gamers. Thanks.

[JediMB]

knacki99 wrote...

Working on a patch is all nice and good but the game is on sale for like 5 weeks now?

3-3½ weeks. The game was released in March, not February.

[Taura-Tierno]

Perzyn2 wrote...

Well, if the patch is fixing ~100 issues than we are talking about one seriously bugged game here.

Sure, some of these are pretty minor probably, but nontheless... One hundred issues is a lot. Some can slip through QA, some are minor enough to be ignored before release with "We'll patch them eventually" attitude. But not in such numbers...

You know, they say that a programmer will make a handful of errors per 1000 lines of code. I think microsoft talked about 15-20 errors per 1000 lines of code. A professor at my university said that an average programmer makes one mistake per 20 lines of code (generally speaking). With no weight whatsoever on how severe those errors are, or if they're even noticeable, of course. But they'd still be "bugs". 

Take that and imagine how many faults would exist in a game as large as DA2, and how many of those it would be feasible to find and eliminate. Just because there are over 100 fixes in the patch, it doesn't mean that there are 100 game-breaking bugs, or 100 bugs that significantly affect the gameplay at all, or that all of those bugs affect a large part of the consumers. 

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

The only bug t I seriously care about is the DRM one that prevents me from playing.

Sorry, Bioware/EA, but if I preorder a game I at least expect to be able to launch it. And if it takes almost a month for you guys to provide a fix for an issue like that, then I doubt I'll be preordering your games ever again since there hardly seems a point.

[BTCentral]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

The only bug t I seriously care about is the DRM one that prevents me from playing.

Sorry, Bioware/EA, but if I preorder a game I at least expect to be able to launch it. And if it takes almost a month for you guys to provide a fix for an issue like that, then I doubt I'll be preordering your games ever again since there hardly seems a point.

People are still having DRM issues? Ouch

Modifié par BTCentral, 02 avril 2011 - 02:25 .

[LamionDeWraith]

knacki99 wrote...


I criticize the release and development behaviour, not the need to patch the game. 'nough said.

As far as critisizing the development behaviour goes, I don't believe any of us has the right to do so in the first place. Making a program is difficult, not to mention tedius, work, and when a programmer has to write line upon line of code for months at a time, issues are going to happen. As consumers, we take the manufacture and design process of the products we use for granted. We often believe that a product should be perfect when it's shipped to us. After all, we spent the money on it, right? Well, you're correct. We paid for a product, and we have the right to a safe, working version of it.

However, let's take a quick look at other industry, such as the auto industry. Whether it's Chevy, Ford, Dodge, Honda, Toyota or anyone else, we have the right to a working product. However, consider the amount of work that goes into the design and manufacture of a single vehicle. They QA these things to death, and ship them out to the dealerships, but we quite often end up with recall notices about any number of issues. We only hear about the big ones, like brakes failing, but if you do a little digging you'll find lists of dozens, or hundreds, of known issues with a single vehilce that you can have fixed at a dealer, free of charge, because it's under recall.

The dealers are responsible for repairing these issues for you, but YOU, as the consumer, need to find out about most of the problems yourself, and then find the time to bring the vehicle to the dealer in order for it to be fixed, at which point it's done for free. Most people are irritated at having to do so, but grateful that the dealer was able to do the work for no charge. This is, in effect, the same QA, Testing and Patch system in use by our video game developers. 

There is, however, a major difference I'd like to point out. We, as consumers, are not required to physically bring our game disks back to the dealer we bought it from in order to have it shipped off, or exchanged, for a new version. We, as consumers, get to sit at home and do what WE want to do, while the developers work hard to fix the issues. What's more, we don't have to do the research and figure out what fixes we're entitled to. The patch rolls out, and all we have to do is download it and install it. Once installed, we have a list of all of the fixes, normally dozens, or even hundreds, of issues we never even knew existed but may have affected us down the road. THEY are the ones doing all of the work, and while it's true that we have the right to a safe, working copy of the product we paid for, they are the ones who are working to make it happen with as little impact on us as possible.

No product of this complexity will ever be perfect when it is released, regardless of whether it is a video game, an automobile, a digital device or anything else. What matters to me, AS a consumer, is how much effort the designer or manufacturer takes to resolve the issues that invariably appear post-launch, and how much responsibility they are willing to take upon themselves for the mistakes.

As far as I am concerned, BioWare has done a fantastic job of creating an interesting game with a lot of potential, and they have been kind enough to try and keep us in the loop, as far as they are legally allowed to do before a patch is released. I'm not going to say I'm not frustrated by the issues, since I have also been affected, but I won't be the one to rant on about the problems when these people are doing more to resolve them in a timely and EFFECTIVE manner than just about any other product manufacturer out there. They all do their part, but game developers typically go above and beyond.

[QuentStormborn]

LamionDeWraith wrote...

Your analogy is flawed.

We, as consumers, get to sit at home and do what WE want to do, while the developers work hard to fix the issues.

Well whoopie freaken do.  Lucky us.  Let's use your silly comparison to see how this would play out with a car.  We have a TSB on our car (which btw you dont have to find yourself, most manufacturers send them out), we take our car in for service.  The dealership won't tell you what they are fixing until they return it, nor will they tell you how long its going to take, could be a couple hours, could be a week or two.  Now would you put up with that kind of service?  Hell no. 

They all do their part, but game developers typically go above and beyond.

This enabling attitude is what allows developers to put out **** games.  Making a game actually playable is not going above and beyond.  Thats getting what you paid for.  Patching game breaking bugs and issues that should have been fixed before release (or at least already known about and being worked on) is not going above and beyond.  No, we don't expect them to find every bug, but if gamers cant even intall or run a game because of issues then clearly something is wrong with the development cycle, which includes QA.  Giving them a pass because well hey they will probably fix it eventually is just doing a disservice to gamers, who are ultimately what keep these companies in business.

Modifié par QuentStormborn, 02 avril 2011 - 02:55 .

[Plate_Captain88]

QuentStormborn wrote...

This enabling attitude is what allows developers to put out **** games.  Making a game actually playable is not going above and beyond.  Thats getting what you paid for.  Patching game breaking bugs and issues that should have been fixed before release (or at least already known about and being worked on) is not going above and beyond.  No, we don't expect them to find every bug, but if gamers cant even intall or run a game because of issues then clearly something is wrong with the development cycle, which includes QA.  Giving them a pass because well hey they will probably fix it eventually is just doing a disservice to gamers, who are ultimately what keep these companies in business.

Well said.

I wish Bioware had never joined EA.

[Espada_Andy_2]

Plate_Captain88 wrote...

QuentStormborn wrote...

This enabling attitude is what allows developers to put out **** games.  Making a game actually playable is not going above and beyond.  Thats getting what you paid for.  Patching game breaking bugs and issues that should have been fixed before release (or at least already known about and being worked on) is not going above and beyond.  No, we don't expect them to find every bug, but if gamers cant even intall or run a game because of issues then clearly something is wrong with the development cycle, which includes QA.  Giving them a pass because well hey they will probably fix it eventually is just doing a disservice to gamers, who are ultimately what keep these companies in business.

Well said.

I wish Bioware had never joined EA.

Do you know what Funding is?
Stop with these "Bioware shound never have joined" nonsense etc etc...

[MikeP999]

QuentStormborn wrote...

LamionDeWraith wrote...

Your analogy is flawed.

We, as consumers, get to sit at home and do what WE want to do, while the developers work hard to fix the issues.

Well whoopie freaken do.  Lucky us.  Let's use your silly comparison to see how this would play out with a car.  We have a TSB on our car (which btw you dont have to find yourself, most manufacturers send them out), we take our car in for service.  The dealership won't tell you what they are fixing until they return it, nor will they tell you how long its going to take, could be a couple hours, could be a week or two.  Now would you put up with that kind of service?  Hell no. 

They all do their part, but game developers typically go above and beyond.

This enabling attitude is what allows developers to put out **** games.  Making a game actually playable is not going above and beyond.  Thats getting what you paid for.  Patching game breaking bugs and issues that should have been fixed before release (or at least already known about and being worked on) is not going above and beyond.  No, we don't expect them to find every bug, but if gamers cant even intall or run a game because of issues then clearly something is wrong with the development cycle, which includes QA.  Giving them a pass because well hey they will probably fix it eventually is just doing a disservice to gamers, who are ultimately what keep these companies in business.

Well said, I agree 100%.  It seems to be the norm these days to release buggy games.  Typically I wait for games to be patched, prior to purchase. I should have done the same for this game.  No need to pat Chris or anyone else on the back for releasing the game in its current state.   I'm not interested in what the reasons are for bug ridden games, as these are simply excuses in my opinion and not helpful in terms of justifying full price.   I don't like feeling 'had', but that's the impression I get from the obvious bugs I've experienced in DAII.    Enjoyable gaming experience sure, but it does not warrant full price.  I will no longer be an early adopter of games.

[Dr.Goodspeed]

Sometimes I feel as if gamers are being treated like second class customers. If any product in roughly the same prize category as a computer/console game is faulty, you can return it and choose one of usually three things.

a) A full repair free of charge. (=> You're being told what is wrong and how long it will take to fix!)
A full refund.
c) A full replacement that actually works.

It doesn't even have to be faulty to the point of being unusable. It's completely sufficient if one feature of the product, however small it may be, does not work as promised.

What do gamers get?

a) If you're lucky you can get a refund from wherever you bought the game. However, with CD key registration, online activation, etc. which are all common practice nowadays it is highly improbable anyone will take a game back after you've used it. And if the retailers does actually take the game back and gives you a refund, it has nothing to do with the game being bugged.

Maybe you can get your disc(s) replaced, but in case of bugs that's totally useless.

So basically your only option is...

c) Wait until a patch comes out that fixes your problems. As far as I know you don't even have a guarantee that a faulty(buggy) game will be patched at all. If it is patched however, it can take infinitely long and it is possible that you get no information whatsoever regarding contents and ETA of the upcoming patch.


I'm well aware this is partially due to the nature of a game, or any piece of software for that matter. However, I cannot think of any other product where a company could survive handling their products like that.

Note: Before you go all bat**** on me => When I'm saying this, I'm not only talking about the current situation with BioWare, but rather about our situation as gamers and customers in general and how I feel about it.