Or its a clear sign how braindead gamers have become to expect ever more complex and huge games to be patched in 10 seconds flat without even the remotest clue how much work is involved and that these things also need to be tested and reproduced and then resolved correctly.
Oh wait, sorry, did I just call you entitled? My bad.
To play devil's advocate for a moment; Have you ever thought to wonder *why* we have accepted this situation? Not just in games, but in the entire software market? We see product after product released with what are frequently *major* bugs, and we simply accept it because "that's just the way it is." That's like car companies building car in which 15% of them have major problems right out of the factory. Now, I'm not suggesting in any way that it's possible for software to be completely and utterly bug-free, partly because people often have systems where the problem is the system, not the actual software in question. But there are also plenty many times where companies are simply not doing enough QA. (A good example of this is Apple, who manages to release updates that cause major wifi issues over and over and over again, despite writing both Mac OS X and iOS for a relatively limited number of device models. No way should those issues be considered "acceptable" or the people complaining about them be accused of feeling "entitled".) I'm not saying that DAI is especially buggy (my limited sample size of exactly 2 suggests it works fine. But I'm running it on 1) A Dedicated game system, and 2) A Dedicated Bootcamp partition on a second computer. I use both my dedicated Windows Box and my Bootcamp partition ONLY for gaming, and both systems tend to run any game I throw at them without any unusual crashing. In the case of DAI I've had not a single crash on either system.) But certainly, sometime, a line needs to be drawn where people start to say "enough is enough" with all the general software bugginess, whether it be games or MS Office, or iOS, or anything else for that matter...