A non buggy game?

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » May 24, 2003, 2:03 pm

I read an article talking about Blizzard's efforts to create a Quake type game called Ghost. Yet again I notice a trend with these guys.

Blizzard has announced that the development schedule for Starcraft: Ghost has been extended past the end of the 2003 to meet the team's goals and "deliver the outstanding gameplay experience our customers have come to expect from Blizzard products." The game is now scheduled for 2004, and Blizzard says it believes "that this additional development time will prove invaluable, ensuring that the game will truly expand on the legendary gameplay experience found in the previous Starcraft titles." The Blizzard statement further said that the developer "will not release the game until it's ready."

By Sam Parker, GameSpot [POSTED: 05/23/03 04:05 PM]

You know, I really appreciate a company that cleans up its code before pushing it off to us.

Would you guys rather get a game early and buggy or way late without major bugs?

Neroon · Post by **Neroon** » May 24, 2003, 3:09 pm

To me, realeasing a buggy product says one of two things. Either they don't have the resources to pull off what they are trying to do, or they care more about money than making a quality product.

All of these companies are trying to make money, but some of them actually care about making a quality fun product as well.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » May 24, 2003, 3:13 pm

if you want a non buggy game, super mario bros on Nintendo one, that shit is streght out smooth sailin

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » May 24, 2003, 5:41 pm

Basically every developer in the world says they won't release a game until it's ready. Seriously, how many press releases have you read where the publisher said, "well this motherfucker is going out the door on April 15th whether its ready or not and we'll just patch the god damn thing later!"

"When it's ready" is the biggest buzzword in game press releases. It just means they don't want to estimate a release date yet.

Blizzard games always get patched multiple times when they come out. They are not totally bug free products. Hell Diablo 2 was fucking mess when it came out and it is actually even worse now than it was on release day.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » May 24, 2003, 10:02 pm

kyoukan wrote:Basically every developer in the world says they won't release a game until it's ready. Seriously, how many press releases have you read where the publisher said, "well this motherfucker is going out the door on April 15th whether its ready or not and we'll just patch the god damn thing later!"

Planetside.

Honestly, I'm looking forward to this game. I the story behind this game, and the gameplay looks very cool. I would say original, but it is bearing some similarities to Splinter Cell, whish is not a bad thing at all.

Asheran Mojomaster · Post by **Asheran Mojomaster** » May 25, 2003, 2:11 am

Blizzard releases the most bugfree games out there. Of course there will be SOME bugs, just they wont be found til the masses get their hands on it and run through the game. Also OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS of their patches are just balancing once players figure out some 1337 strat that makes some class in Diablo \ race in Warcraft overpowered.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » May 25, 2003, 2:13 am

Until they fix star fall or implement some equally impressive abilities in the Frozen Throne, the game will never be balanced.

Mumblefug · Post by **Mumblefug** » May 25, 2003, 8:44 am

God remember Magic:The gathering before (even after) the patch? I have never seen a computer crash so frequently.

Mumble

Letania · Post by **Letania** » May 25, 2003, 10:54 am

Zamtuk wrote:Until they fix star fall or implement some equally impressive abilities in the Frozen Throne, the game will never be balanced.

You're joking. That or you don't know what you're talking about.

As to the topic, Blizzard will always delay their games, it's a complete given when discussing their release dates. Their products aren't good because of the delays to 'iron it out', they're good because of the teams working on them.

And sometimes they can suck just like anyone else: D2 without expansion and D2 in 1.09.

noel · Post by **noel** » May 25, 2003, 3:00 pm

Blizzard has announced that the development schedule for Starcraft: Ghost has been extended past the end of the 2003 to meet the team's goals and "deliver the outstanding gameplay experience our customers have come to expect from Blizzard products." The game is now scheduled for 2004, and Blizzard says it believes "that this additional development time will prove invaluable, ensuring that the game will truly expand on the legendary gameplay experience found in the previous Starcraft titles." The Blizzard statement further said that the developer "will not release the game until it's ready."

By Sam Parker, GameSpot [POSTED: 05/23/03 04:05 PM

Translation:
We just got done playing Splinter-Cell, and we need to recode to rip off some features/story-lines/concepts we saw in that game.

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » May 25, 2003, 3:01 pm

Yea but they'll have "laaaazeeerrrrr beams"

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » May 25, 2003, 4:29 pm

"A delayed game is eventually good, a bad game is bad forever."

-Shigeru Miyamoto

-=Lohrno

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » May 25, 2003, 5:41 pm

"I've been remaking the same two games over and over again since 1985"

-Shigeru Miyamoto

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » May 25, 2003, 5:50 pm

Haha good point!

(did he actually say that?

I mean I guess I could imagine him saying that heh.)

But that's not all he's been doing. He's considered the greatest game designer for many reasons... (One of which is simply his experience, he's probably the game designer who's held his job the longest.) These days it looks like he mostly consults, and mentors people though.

I think his point is still valid though.

-=Lohrno

Wulfran · Post by **Wulfran** » May 25, 2003, 5:50 pm

Just because the game has delays to "clean up the code" doesn't mean much. It means their management team is willing to ackowledge they have enough discovered problems that they will look like shit if they push it out.

A delayed game can still suck hardcore. Wait until release (or beta if you are able to participate) to pass judgement: this goes for Blizzard products, or SOE products or anyone else. The creating company doesn't guarantee a fucking thing.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » May 25, 2003, 6:50 pm

I think that's pretty obvious.

It's just that I think it's better that companies not release a game on time than release it early and with a lot of bugs. It costs them more, it annoys us more, and if they delay to fix things (which are not necessarily always bugs, but perhaps gameplay issues.), it is better for everyone. If they don't then they might not be in business that much longer.

It is all a balance though. (IE: Where is Duke Nukem Forever?)

-=Lohrno

Spangaloid_PE · Post by **Spangaloid_PE** » May 25, 2003, 6:58 pm

who gives a shit when the game is released. have you ever looked at a game and thought, "i don't wanna buy this game and play it, it looks bad ass but it wasn't released on time, so fuck them."

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » May 25, 2003, 7:12 pm

No, the point isn't that all games must be released late, it's that if a game is late because it has problems and they are being fixed, it's better than if a game is on time and is chock full o bugs and bad gameplay.

-=Lohrno

Spangaloid_PE · Post by **Spangaloid_PE** » May 25, 2003, 7:15 pm

Lohrno wrote:No, the point isn't that all games must be released late, it's that if a game is late because it has problems and they are being fixed, it's better than if a game is on time and is chock full o bugs and bad gameplay.

-=Lohrno

isn't that common sense?

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » May 25, 2003, 7:54 pm

You'd think so but things aren't always that clear cut. Sometimes the publisher is bitching that it's not out yet, the players are bitching, etc. The company might not have the funds to put up for 3-6 more months of debugging and fixing, etc. There are also deadlines. For example, for a console game to be out by Christmas, it has to be ready and bug free by July. If the game isn't ready the publisher may decide to scrap it entirely.

-=Lohrno

Wulfran · Post by **Wulfran** » May 25, 2003, 11:59 pm

My apologies to you Lohrno, if I misunderstood your intent, but I was mostly responding to the Pro-Blizzard hype I have seen here, based on a product no one has seen or will see for another year, maybe more.

People keep lauding Blizzard, like they are fucking gods. I played some of the Warcraft games, Starcraft and Diablo 1. They weren't "flawless" or "perfect"or even bug free. Diablo was a good game but had limited replayability for me. Warcraft and Starcraft were OK but to be honest, for real time strats, of that type, I enjoyed Microsoft's Age of Empires/Kings more. I intentionally avoided Diablo 2 because I heard it was a mess from release and never got on its feet.

I'll contrast that to EQ, which for its bugs and gameplay issues has kept me for almost 4 years now. Even people who retired a while ago, except on these boards (like Kyou) played EQ, with all its flaws for 2+ years. Now some people are burnt after 4 years and pissed off and leaving (see the "Time" thread): fine and dandy. But I see zero reason for the blind fanboism for Blizzard and WOW in particular.

Some of the people who post here and on other forums hold a lot of respect from me. I may well be swayed by their opinions, once they deal with a finished product. Until then, its all hot air and wasted band width.

miir · Post by **miir** » May 26, 2003, 11:30 am

Blizzard releases the most bugfree games out there

Bullshit.
Diablo and Diablo 2 were (and still are) buggy as fuck.

Was Starcraft bugfree?
Fuck no, there has been nearly a dozen patches since release.

Warcraft 3 was fairly bug free considering this was blizzard's 4th RTS game in like 10 years, I hope they would finally get it right.

People talk about games being bug free like it's a guaran-fucking-tee that it will be a good game... How many patches did Half Life/CS and Q2 have and they are classics. Age Of Empires had it's fair share of bugs as did Total Annihilation and the C&C games but I wasted shitloads of hours playing those games. Anarchy Online was buggy as fuck but I played it for a year and a half and was planning on reactivating my account again because I miss the gameplay and so I can pump a full auto into a Reet.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » May 26, 2003, 1:33 pm

Wulfran wrote:My apologies to you Lohrno, if I misunderstood your intent, but I was mostly responding to the Pro-Blizzard hype I have seen here, based on a product no one has seen or will see for another year, maybe more.

No problem, I'm wasn't in fanboyism, sorry.

I just kind of think that people shouldn't be too hard on developers that decide to hold their product back so it can be good, and not buggy. I also kind of wanted to show why developers might release something that is kind of buggy. (They might want to fix it, but there are other forces at work...) At least if the players don't bitch so much, it might help the situation a bit.

From what I've seen of WoW it looks not that much different from other MMORPGs, with the exception of cool graphics, and cats that you can pull out of your bag, and ride around.

-=Lohrno

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » May 26, 2003, 2:00 pm

I'm actually still waiting for CoH. Which incidently got the cover of next months PC Gamer.

noel · Post by **noel** » May 26, 2003, 3:11 pm

I've been loosely following City of Heroes for the last two years. My expectations are: Dumbed down MMOG w/super hero theme that might be fun for a few months.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » May 26, 2003, 3:15 pm

Yeah, I'm hoping to get my fill in beta, if I get accepted. I am really intrigued by the idea. And also a little curious to see how they pull off gangwars, bank robberies, alien invasions, etc.

Trek · Post by **Trek** » May 26, 2003, 3:18 pm

CoH didnt look that great to me at E3. Now if you could roll a super villian and wreck havok on the city and fight Spppidermaaan and the Huullkk instead of everyone being a super hero, then maybe I would be interested

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » May 26, 2003, 4:21 pm

They claim that will be available in the first expansion.

Trek · Post by **Trek** » May 27, 2003, 3:25 am

Odd that I dont recall them mentioning it during their showing, but I wasnt paying that close of attention to em.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » May 27, 2003, 3:39 am

It is on their website in a couple of places. It may even be in the FAQ or the new update.

Melrin_Specclaster · Post by **Melrin_Specclaster** » May 27, 2003, 4:21 pm

Diablo may not have been bug free, but it was at least playable, very much so. The difference between rush and fix is the level its playable when released. I play Shadowbane some and I wouldnt give it a 50% playability rating.

miir · Post by **miir** » May 27, 2003, 4:55 pm

Diablo may not have been bug free, but it was at least playable, very much so.

So are 95% of the games that are released.

Buggy and playable is the norm for most PC games.

Vailex Darkfury · Post by **Vailex Darkfury** » May 27, 2003, 7:42 pm

No silver bullet.

Mr Bacon · Post by **Mr Bacon** » May 28, 2003, 12:43 am

The only not bugged game is life.

Think about it.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » May 28, 2003, 1:42 pm

Rellix wrote:The only not bugged game is life.

Think about it.

Well, this is true, however, most console games have to be bug free on release because there is no way to patch a read-only DVD (or cart back in the day...) short of making another one. But it seems that PC games have a norm of releasing 3 patches after it's released.

That isn't to say console games ARE bug free, it's just that for the most part we don't notice them because they have been tested vigorously for bugs.

-=Lohrno

miir · Post by **miir** » May 28, 2003, 1:59 pm

That isn't to say console games ARE bug free, it's just that for the most part we don't notice them because they have been tested vigorously for bugs.

The main reason console games have few bugs is not because of testing and QA.

It's because they are not required to be compatable with virtually hundreds of thousands of different hardware configuations.

The QA and testing that goes into PC games is far more thorough and rigorous than console games.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » May 28, 2003, 2:26 pm

In my experience it isn't. PC will run through a "fairly standard" set of compatibility tests if youre lucky and that's about it. They'll go through the same gameplay QA as any other platform's games and as such you're at the whim of different companies' QA Depts.

I doubt there'll every be a completely bug-free PC game release. The machines just vary too much. The number of OS and driver updates and patches is an indicator of this.
With consoles you're _almost_ guaranteed to be working with the same hardware all the time but even current PS2 games have sly BIOS fixes built into them. And then there was the PS1 where they sneakily changed the GPU about halfway through it's lifespan and didn't tell anyone. . .

VeeshanVault

A non buggy game?

A non buggy game?

Re: A non buggy game?