Buy now, patch later...

Associate
Joined
7 Dec 2006
Posts
1,632
It seems more and more games these days seemed to be released in an obviously unfinished state.
Those who buy on day of release may have to wait days or weeks for a patch to be released to address serious playability issues - gothik 3 or Neverwinter Knights 2 for instance. I wonder how many of these initial purchasers have their experience of a game ruined by these playabilty issues and consign the game to a dusty shelf somewhere to be tried again maybe at a later date when a patch becomes available.
Personally I would never buy a game at launch, I would much rather wait unitl it's patched. What do others think?
 
I would opt to support the developers over the publishers, therefore I would buy at launch and patiently await the patches from the dev team, who would likely have been forced to put the game out before it was 'finished'.
But as with every software, there is always room for improvement - its a good thing in my eyes that patches come - shows that the team care about the player base even after they've made the quick buck.
Look at BF2, I don't pay anything to play that past the initial £30, but patches have come.
 
Helium_Junkie said:
I would opt to support the developers over the publishers, therefore I would buy at launch and patiently await the patches from the dev team, who would likely have been forced to put the game out before it was 'finished'.
But as with every software, there is always room for improvement - its a good thing in my eyes that patches come - shows that the team care about the player base even after they've made the quick buck.
Look at BF2, I don't pay anything to play that past the initial £30, but patches have come.
mainly because there are rules about selling faulty goods.
 
I'm doing exactly this with Medi 2. I picked the game up about a week ago, and after speaking to a few people on this forum, I've decided to wait a week until the patch comes out.

Obviously, if one is not forthcoming this week, then I'll install anyway, and wait for the patch.

I don't mind all this unfinished/patch situation to be honest. I find it all quite amusing... Neverwinter Nights 2 had a patch available on the day after it was released... nice!
 
Depends on the company imo. I mean you have BF2 who is made by (guess who :rolleyes: ) and same for 2142 they are loaded with bugs, but no the patches don't make them better in EA's case, they release one and put everyone in a world of LANGUAGE! , constant crashes etc.

Companies usually release the game and patch later because of targets they need to meet, like getting the game done within a certain time. Too many delays and you get another Stalker, even though Stalker looks good people don't care as much at all as they would have a year or 2 back. But EA just throw games out in 6 months or whatever like they did with 2142. You can usually tell if quality work and dedication has been put into a game, such as Company of Heroes etc.
 
Macabre, swearing even using a $ for an S is still against the rules, suggest you edit that matey!

Releasing patches after the games doesnt prove they care about the players either, what it does mean it that they want to appear as though they care so you will buy more of their faulty projects later on!
 
I think a lot of times you only see people posting about problems they have with a game. Those that are not having problems are quite happily playing the game.
My obvious example is BF2, i have played it since 1 second past 9am on day of release and clocked up well over 1300 hours online on what most would say is a sub standard system. My system has always been a step behind most dudes systems but has played BF2 brilliantly.
I have constantly posted fixes for people moaning of problems but do they start a thread or even post back, Sorted, thanks all Great game, No they don't.
The majority of these fixes have been in the way they have there system set up or set to run said game. Some as simple as not patching it properly or from a dodgey source or them being over ambitious with setting choices.
The bugs we all know are actually there certainly do not effect the game to the extent of me not playing it.
I thank the developers for giving me the game they have at the time they gave it me and adjust accordingly.
As far as i am concerned they lived up to there end by continually patching until they/we got a happy medium.
Now at 1.41 BF2 plays online lovely with just one or two bugs popping up.
Would i have wanted to wait until this month to get a released BF2 1.41 or would i have preferred playing it as it was for the last year and my plus 1300 hours :p are you Nuts.
I want it released as soon as possible and let me get it running :p
Seriously with all the different types of hardware people are trying to get the same game running on i am always amazed when it does.
All this for around 30 quid i mean i ask you
 
Well, for games by the makers of BF2 etc, I'd wait a year before buying.

With X3, I bought it, tried it... Got fed up of crashes and left it for 5 months.
Now that v2 of the patch is out - It is actually playable.
So I am now playing it after having it on my shelf for 5 months.

Yes - It seems to becoming more common, more and more games are actually unplayable/very low quality gaming until a week/month/more after their release.

Games like UT2007 I'll buy on pre-order - I know it will run properly and be a good game from the get go.
But the number of games I'll be pre-ordering will be less and less these days.
 
Do you think you could return to shops on the grounds that a game is faulty if it is constantly crashing/unplayable and they take more than a week say to patch it??
 
PikeyPriest said:
Do you think you could return to shops on the grounds that a game is faulty if it is constantly crashing/unplayable and they take more than a week say to patch it??


Probably not. Just like if you decide you don't agree with the terms of the EULA, even though you can't actually read the EULA before you buy it, most places won't take PC games back for what you paid for it.
 
Father Ted said:
I assume the situation is not the same for console games, are they properly tested before release. Is it just us PC owners who are being taken for mugs?

no, console games can be just as bad. Driver 3 for instance, i think i managed to crash that game several times before i got fed up with it and gave it away!

The main reason for bugs in PC games is due to the vast amount of differences from one machine to another. GFX cards, CPUs, RAM etc all cause major problems for developers. If the hardware people got together and could agree on one set of standards for each piece of hardware then maybe things could pick up. Consoles are always the same as each other, this makes it a lot easier to develop games for them, it results in a faster development time and less bugs.
 
Last edited:
Rebelius said:
Probably not. Just like if you decide you don't agree with the terms of the EULA, even though you can't actually read the EULA before you buy it, most places won't take PC games back for what you paid for it.
legaly
you are entitaled to return ANY GOODS that are not fit for use. ie don't work.
if they give you gumph about not taking it about call up the CAB while instore and have a chat. its the same with EULA, if you're not willing to agree with it then you are entitaled to a refund. its like saying that you've bought a car from a dealership, then found that its not actualy running even tho it was sold as working!
 
I've found shops happy to let you return a pc game that won't work on your system despite it meeting the requirements. They normally let you swap for a different game but perhaps I've just been lucky.
 
VeNT said:
legaly
you are entitaled to return ANY GOODS that are not fit for use. ie don't work.
if they give you gumph about not taking it about call up the CAB while instore and have a chat. its the same with EULA, if you're not willing to agree with it then you are entitaled to a refund. its like saying that you've bought a car from a dealership, then found that its not actualy running even tho it was sold as working!

it isnt that easy

a game can still be considered to "work" under trading legislation even if it has a habit of crashing.

probably the only way you could legally force a retailer to give you a cash refund was if the media the game was supplied with wouldnt load it onto your PC. but a game can crash due to your fault, not just the developers, so it would be very hard to proove to a retailer that your PC was perfect and coudlnt possibly casuing the cash due to driver conflict or whatever.
 
Nostalgia's a wonderful thing; games have always been buggy (atleast as far as I can remember). Games such as Hidden and Dangerous, Delta Force and although newer, even Operation Flashpoint.

They're not getting any worse, it's just people are more vocal about it now-a-days.

Even if it were true, it wouldn't be that surprising - there's a LOT more different combinations of hardware available now then there was 4 - 6 years ago!

-RaZ
 
Quixote said:
I've found shops happy to let you return a pc game that won't work on your system despite it meeting the requirements. They normally let you swap for a different game but perhaps I've just been lucky.


swapping for another game isn't the same as getting your money back though. which you should be able to do, but I doubt you'd manage in any of the high street retailers these days.
 
MoNkeE said:
Nostalgia's a wonderful thing; games have always been buggy (atleast as far as I can remember). Games such as Hidden and Dangerous

god i loved that game, right up until you suddenly started floating 6ft above the ground when you should have been lying down and then you died. Ladders, what a nightmare they where!

Worst level though had to be the one where you had to sneak through the town and get onto the boat on the docks, god knows how many times i reached the boat and started sailing away only for one of my guys to jump into the air, over the side and into the water dying!

:)

cracking game.
 
Back
Top Bottom