108 réponses à ce sujet

[Maconbar]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

RagingCyclone wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Atmosfear3 wrote...

This is such a cop out and really goes to show that BW are simply lazy developers. The number of people experiencing X problem should never be a factor in whether or not you should work to fix a problem. Any problems the game has should always be fixed, no matter how small or big. How would you feel if your power company decides to only fix a problem only when the whole block as gone dark?

Says the person who isn't required to spend money with zero return of investment everytime a patch is released.

No, it's called customer relations. Patches should be addressed in much the same fashion that recalls are handled by automakers as an example. Automakers do not make money on recalls either, but do so not only for safety reasons but to build brand loyalty amongst the customer base. A cost now can lead to profits later if done correctly.

Apples and oranges.

With software, unless everyone is experiencing the same problem, it is often related to the player's hardware; the operating system and version they are running, other applications they may have open, etc.  Sometimes, too, it is a very specific sequence of commands the user entered - and troubleshooting and finding that kind of bug can be like searching for a needle in a haystack.  Much more expensive and time-consuming than you might imagine if you've never done it. 

They have no control over the hardware and operating system environment that you are using.  Any patch has to be thoroughly re-rested on a variety of machines with different configurations and also certified by the platform manufacturer before it can be released.  For a relatively minor bug that only effects a small portion of the player population, it is pretty difficult to justify the expense.

It's also apples and oranges because auto recalls are covered by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Yes, the auto manufacturer can initiate the process, but many recalls are court-ordered.

[RagingCyclone]

Maconbar wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

RagingCyclone wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Atmosfear3 wrote...

This is such a cop out and really goes to show that BW are simply lazy developers. The number of people experiencing X problem should never be a factor in whether or not you should work to fix a problem. Any problems the game has should always be fixed, no matter how small or big. How would you feel if your power company decides to only fix a problem only when the whole block as gone dark?

Says the person who isn't required to spend money with zero return of investment everytime a patch is released.

No, it's called customer relations. Patches should be addressed in much the same fashion that recalls are handled by automakers as an example. Automakers do not make money on recalls either, but do so not only for safety reasons but to build brand loyalty amongst the customer base. A cost now can lead to profits later if done correctly.

Apples and oranges.

With software, unless everyone is experiencing the same problem, it is often related to the player's hardware; the operating system and version they are running, other applications they may have open, etc.  Sometimes, too, it is a very specific sequence of commands the user entered - and troubleshooting and finding that kind of bug can be like searching for a needle in a haystack.  Much more expensive and time-consuming than you might imagine if you've never done it. 

They have no control over the hardware and operating system environment that you are using.  Any patch has to be thoroughly re-rested on a variety of machines with different configurations and also certified by the platform manufacturer before it can be released.  For a relatively minor bug that only effects a small portion of the player population, it is pretty difficult to justify the expense.

It's also apples and oranges because auto recalls are covered by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Yes, the auto manufacturer can initiate the process, but many recalls are court-ordered.

Concerning the auto industry you are both making assumptions. Having worked on the logistical aspect of the auto industry for over a decade, I think I know a little about how many recalls are performed. But the main point I was making was concerning the business model itself and using a parallel. But since the point was lost on you I will bow out and let you believe what you want to believe. <_<

Modifié par RagingCyclone, 10 septembre 2011 - 12:45 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

Let me be clear that I really appreciate the people working at BW. I do have some critique concerning the policies of the company, though. So, this is not an attack towards the individuals working at the company.

To support the game properly all a company has to do is to select the proper business model. CDPR, for an example, is not a charity institution and they plan expenses like patches and free content. They simply know that complex software is likely to have bugs and adapt their business plan to it. That realistic attitude is appreciated by fans. BW just feels that patches should be avoided at all costs. They only care to release a patch if the game crashes or if there are enough public complaints. DA:O is a good example. BW promised two year support, but stopped long before that, because "DA2 happened". Of course that sudden policy change is not appreciated by some of us. I think it is damaging the image and credibility of the company. So, instead of doing better for DA2, BW promised nothing at all. Both DA:O and DA2 still have a lot of bugs. Most are documented on the Wikia site. These volunteers did a great job and even tested them and suggested workarounds for all supported platforms.

I see it in other parts of the company too. The same policy has been applied to BSN. It works and we should be happy, although the site is buggy and has many quirks. BW has only fixed some of those and does not intend to fix all. Apparently the annoyance it brings to a couple of million people is not important enough. CDPR did even worse, BTW. They closed their site during the release of TW2. Of course I posted there once it came online again that I didn't appreciate that I needed to register to a third party service or forum to get support during the offline period. Given the other positive traits of that company it made me scratch my head.

[Tyrium]

doctor echo wrote...

For those who have played Dragon Age II; finished the game and saved(as many times as you did) and want to play through as a totally new character...DO NOT SELECT NEW GAME!!! AS IT WILL ERASE ALL OF YOUR PREVIOUSLY SAVED DATA!!!

One would think that there would be better file management to facilitate multiple replays while still preserving saved data; especially on the next gen consoles.  I don't mind replaying; but i do think deleting the previous saves without even a warning message prior to doing so is just so "old"

Did anyone else experience this; or am i just too "old" to have expected something that was common in older games tobe remedied on today's gaming consoles. 

Share your experiences with me...

Never experienced that one.

[DriftSpace]

Chris Priestly wrote...
We are still concerned about patching and our team is still directly talking with fans submitting us saved games to help us track bugs.

Good, 'cause I have a trio of saves that might be the end-all of the "Supplier" trophy bug.
How do I get these to the team? I sumitted the files through the EA support site, but that proved to be mostly fruitless.

[Pasquale1234]

RagingCyclone wrote...

Concerning the auto industry you are both making assumptions. Having worked on the logistical aspect of the auto industry for over a decade, I think I know a little about how many recalls are performed. But the main point I was making was concerning the business model itself and using a parallel. But since the point was lost on you I will bow out and let you believe what you want to believe. <_<

Really?  Perhaps you'd like to point out the assumption I made, since I spoke only for the software industry, in which I do have a great deal of experience.

Software vendors do release a lot of patches.  Auto manufacturers do not always repair every component that fails prematurely due to a less-than-optimal design - which is why we see so many after-market parts that are better than the originals they are made to replace.

[FieryDove]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Are we still supporting Dragon Age II? Absolutely.

Is there still talk of a tool or official save game editor/comic/whatever was in mind to generate/fix previous games saves? If DA3 can use DA2 saves wouldn't that add to the pile if it doesn't get fixed now rather than later?

I know Mike talked a bit about it but it seemed he was saying moving forward DA3 onwards the flag/bug issues would be a priority and DAO/dlc/DA2 would not be. That was my understanding from the limited amount of discussion on it.

[Rafficus III]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Yes, we are still supporting Dragon Age II.

 When I can say more, I will as I know you all want more information.

Are we still supporting Dragon Age II? Absolutely.

The best post on this board. I look forward to more DLC after playing Legacy, the best DLC sidequest released in the DA series in my opinion. Shale's DLC is a close second solely because of her sassy character. Keep churning out the DA and I'll keep having a good excuse to not play other games.

[devSin]

FieryDove wrote...

Is there still talk of a tool or official save game editor/comic/whatever was in mind to generate/fix previous games saves? If DA3 can use DA2 saves wouldn't that add to the pile if it doesn't get fixed now rather than later?

Keep in mind that this comes from two sources, who were being purposely vague.

There was a (claimed) quote from Rob where the issue was discussed and the hint given that a solution was being worked on. This was in response to a support question about DA2 imports, so it seems to suggest that they're working on a solution for DA2 (why would you respond to somebody with that specific a question about DA2, telling them you think they'll like what you have planned, if you're not actually doing anything until DA3).

Then Mike also made a statement that import bugs are bad, and he had a vague comment about the live team plans possibly coming to fruition or not (which I take to mean they simply had ideas and possibilities at that point, not solutions).

So I guess you'll just have to wait to see. Rob's alleged quote made it sound like a generator, and Mike's quote made it sound like a possibility instead of a certainty. And there's no sure way to tell whether either were hinting at something for DA2 or just some plan they were considering for DA3.

Modifié par devSin, 13 septembre 2011 - 09:44 .