Bethesda admit to knowing the game was broken before release : V - Skyrim

» Tue May 22, 2012 2:53 pm

As was noted, Bethesda corrected what was said, indicating that this interview happened.

True, but the guy I quoted could very well say that Bethesda never said that, because there's no video of them saying it, that's why I didn't mention it.

» Tue May 22, 2012 4:58 pm

Has anyone tried e-mailing Bethesda about a refund to avoid legal matters? I was thinking of contacting my lawyer due to the fact that they knew the game was broken on release. They say that it's the way people play the game that causes the issues but on the back of the game case it clearly says "a complete virtual open world for you to explore ANY WAY YOU CHOOSE.

No talking about suing Bethesda on the forums. Just hit the brakes on that tangent before the thread ends up locked because it's been kind of a good thread.

» Tue May 22, 2012 8:36 pm

Has anyone tried e-mailing Bethesda about a refund to avoid legal matters? I was thinking of contacting my lawyer due to the fact that they knew the game was broken on release. They say that it's the way people play the game that causes the issues but on the back of the game case it clearly says "a complete virtual open world for you to explore ANY WAY YOU CHOOSE.

No lawyer is going to take a $60 case.

Let me take that back, no one in their right mind would hire a lawyer and pay them their fees for a $60 case.

» Wed May 23, 2012 2:06 am

I understand why everyone is angry, but the "If Bethesda made cars..." argument has been way over played. This isn't a car. We're not in danger of dying if it malfunctions. The fact is that this is just a video game, albeit a broken video game that we purchased like it wasn't broken because we weren't told otherwise.

Then make it a coffee machine or a hairdryer. Both would just let the people using them regularly freak out if they wouldn't work anymore or just sporadically although they purchased them a short while ago. A virtual good is as important as a physical one when sold. Broken goods shall not been released and recalled if they turned out as malfunctioning afterwards. Skyrim falls in the first category ...
Wake up people, it doesn't matter if your purchased car breaks, the house-door won't close, your diamond is flawed or a game is not functioning properly ...

» Tue May 22, 2012 8:31 pm

I understand why everyone is angry, but the "If Bethesda made cars..." argument has been way over played. This isn't a car. We're not in danger of dying if it malfunctions. The fact is that this is just a video game, albeit a broken video game that we purchased like it wasn't broken because we weren't told otherwise.

Right, I was saying that the same level of inspection should apply to all developers or manufacturers.
If you wouldn't release a broken car, you wouldn't release a broken game.

» Tue May 22, 2012 11:42 pm

EDIT: To http://www.gamesas.com/user/651842-thefalkon/: No, not all manufacturers should be held to the same standard as automobile manufacturers. It's a different beast altogether when your product means the life or death of your customers. This is just a game. The response should be a refund or some other compromise. I'd settle for a free pc version.

Then make it a coffee machine or a hairdryer. Both would just let the people using them regularly freak out if they wouldn't work anymore or just sporadically although they purchased them a short while ago. A virtual good is as important as a physical one when sold. Broken goods shall not been released and recalled if they turned out as malfunctioning afterwards. Skyrim falls in the first category ...
Wake up people, it doesn't matter if your purchased car breaks, the house-door won't close, your diamond is flawed or a game is not functioning properly ...

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely agree that the ps3 version is broken. I likewise feel lied to by Bethesda. I'm just taking this as a lesson to only ever buy their games on pc.

I'm just saying that it isn't a car. People aren't dying because their Skyrim stopped working.

» Tue May 22, 2012 7:01 pm

Double Post..sorry

» Wed May 23, 2012 1:12 am

I'm more curious (curious, not complaining) about as to why have Bethesda only decided to break the silence now? What changed?

» Tue May 22, 2012 11:08 pm

Then make it a coffee machine or a hairdryer. Both would just let the people using them regularly freak out if they wouldn't work anymore or just sporadically although they purchased them a short while ago. A virtual good is as important as a physical one when sold. Broken goods shall not been released and recalled if they turned out as malfunctioning afterwards. Skyrim falls in the first category ...
Wake up people, it doesn't matter if your purchased car breaks, the house-door won't close, your diamond is flawed or a game is not functioning properly ...

There are failure rates with all of the above. No recalls are ever done for a small percentage of issues. That percentage is considered.. acceptable.

» Tue May 22, 2012 8:42 pm

Then make it a coffee machine or a hairdryer. Both would just let the people using them regularly freak out if they wouldn't work anymore or just sporadically although they purchased them a short while ago. A virtual good is as important as a physical one when sold. Broken goods shall not been released and recalled if they turned out as malfunctioning afterwards. Skyrim falls in the first category ...
Wake up people, it doesn't matter if your purchased car breaks, the house-door won't close, your diamond is flawed or a game is not functioning properly ...

The main difference here (and the main problem in any anology that compares a video game to a physical product like a ring, or a hair drier, or a car) is that video games can be fixed via patches. You can't really plug your hair drier into your router to fix it. And it's the fact that patching is even possible that makes companies think that it's acceptable to release a game that still has bugs in it and just lay out plans to fix them later.

» Tue May 22, 2012 5:54 pm

I would be happy if Bethesda would give me a refund. I could not get one at the store.

» Tue May 22, 2012 5:45 pm

Being a web programmer, I know that my customers would hang me by the balls if I told them the following after 3 months of the site's launch:

Hey, I knew that some bugs would occur beforehand, but since you wanted it launched on 11/11/11, I thought "okay, I'll fix them later". Then, "later" became a bit stretched, and it took me 3 months to make your site accessible and working again, because the technology I used was experimental, buggy and not tested thoroughly for all browsers. But hey, only a small percentage of people use X browser, so you weren't hurt much, eh? And be glad I fixed it anyway.

» Tue May 22, 2012 3:02 pm

what's going on with ME3 on the PS3?

http://youtu.be/MFBTuleh7R8

It ain't pretty. The demo is likely older code per usual but there have been multiple non-public versions of that demo so how it compares to the final release is anyone's guess.

» Tue May 22, 2012 8:17 pm

I'm more curious (curious, not complaining) about as to why have Bethesda only decided to break the silence now? What changed?

Because 1.4 largely fixes the problem (or at least brings the number of affected machines down to an acceptable level).

There are failure rates with all of the above.

Yep. And every industry is different. Good point.

» Tue May 22, 2012 8:44 pm

The main difference here (and the main problem in any anology that compares a video game to a physical product like a ring, or a hair drier, or a car) is that video games can be fixed via patches. You can't really plug your hair drier into your router to fix it. And it's the fact that patching is even possible that makes companies think that it's acceptable to release a game that still has bugs in it and just lay out plans to fix them later.

The major problem with that is not everyone that has a game console has the internet.

» Wed May 23, 2012 12:58 am

Being a web programmer, I know that my customers would hang me by the balls if I told them the following after 3 months of the site's launch:

Hey, I knew that some bugs would occur beforehand, but since you wanted it launched on 11/11/11, I thought "okay, I'll fix them later". Then, "later" became a bit stretched, and it took me 3 months to make your site accessible and working again, because the technology I used was experimental, buggy and not tested thoroughly for all browsers. But hey, only a small percentage of people use X browser, so you weren't hurt much, eh? And be glad I fixed it anyway.

If you have customers that would do that, you should consider finding a different clientel.

» Tue May 22, 2012 9:23 pm

The main difference here (and the main problem in any anology that compares a video game to a physical product like a ring, or a hair drier, or a car) is that video games can be fixed via patches. You can't really plug your hair drier into your router to fix it. And it's the fact that patching is even possible that makes companies think that it's acceptable to release a game that still has bugs in it and just lay out plans to fix them later.

You assume that the company behind that product assures such "fix". Given Bethesda's history, I doubt that pretty much.

» Tue May 22, 2012 9:22 pm

The major problem with that is not everyone that has a game console has the internet.

In that case, they're already not playing in a standard environment (i.e. the latest ps3 updates).

» Tue May 22, 2012 6:30 pm

Because 1.4 largely fixes the problem (or at least brings the number of affected machines down to an acceptable level).

Even so, they could still continue to the "nothing is happening" way of life.

» Tue May 22, 2012 3:20 pm

The major problem with that is not everyone that has a game console has the internet.

While I agree with that, it doesn't change the fact that the patching process period is extremely enabling to companies that find it acceptable to release products that they know still have issues that need to be fixed. If you look at PS3/360 games versus Wii games as far as release bugs are considered the Wii games are FAR more stable simply because it's all but impossible to patch them after release.

» Wed May 23, 2012 12:33 am

If you have customers that would do that, you should consider finding a different clientel.

It was a silly exaggeration, but I hope you got the point of the rest of what I said. It would hurt my image immensely, and future customers would be skeptical about hiring me. What would be my excuse? "I create beautiful, unique, deep websites, but they sometimes don't work for a small percentage of your audience". Nope, not in a million years.

» Wed May 23, 2012 12:04 am

In that case, they're already not playing in a standard environment (i.e. the latest ps3 updates).

PS3 firmware updates come on the disc with games released after the firmware's online release.

» Wed May 23, 2012 12:32 am

It's not easy to delay something.
Games are expensive to make, and Bethesda is not the only company profiting from the game.
So there is pressure to release it.

That's the thing that a lot of companies are doing today.
Release a product with flaws, profit, and fix it.
Because maybe there're running out of given money, and they need profit.

» Tue May 22, 2012 9:52 pm

I'm more curious (curious, not complaining) about as to why have Bethesda only decided to break the silence now? What changed?

Kotaku scored an interview with Todd Howard and asked the question. He couldn't exactly respond with silence like Bethesda can with message board users.

» Tue May 22, 2012 8:25 pm

Skyrim is a 3.7+ signed game so it requires that firmware version or higher to be present and it would be included on the disc. (the 1.4 patch is 4.0+ for those keeping score at home)