I would assume its like this for most game company's
To answer many questions about the game update / patching process, I’ve provided a short walkthrough below to explain how it works and provide some basic timelines for each phase in the cycle.

Phase 1: Gather feedback, reproduce reports and implement solutions.
* ? As soon as the game is released, we scour the forums and play online with fans to gather feedback.
* ? The QA team reproduces all feedback reports in a test environment, enters them into our database, and assigns them to dev team members.
o o Like any scientific process, reports must be reproduced in the test lab before they can be addressed. With millions of users playing the game, something reported by only a small number of users may not be easily reproducible. For this, it’s important that all reports in the forums provide as much helpful information as they can.
* ? Estimated time: Generally 2 weeks to build a comprehensive list, reproduce in the test environment, research cause, and implement solutions. This phase is typically the longest part of the process and can easily take more than 2 weeks, depending on the number and complexity of reports. Once a game is released, every change made is high risk, and adequate time is needed to implement the best possible solution.

Phase 2: Test internally.
* ? Once the highest priority reports have been resolved, the updated game goes through a rigorous internal testing procedure.
* ? If new issues are discovered or the original issue is not fixed appropriately, more time is needed to research and implement new solutions. Video games are highly complex pieces of software. Every change made has a potential impact somewhere else in the game, so the entire game has to be tested with each update.
* ? Estimated time: Minimum of 1 week to thoroughly test the entire game and internally approve the update for release.

Phase 3: Console manufacturers test and approve the update for release.
* ? As soon as our QA team has approved the update internally, it is then submitted to the console manufacturers for their own testing and approval. At this point, it is out of our hands.
* ? If the game update is approved by the console manufacturers, the cycle is done and the update is prepped for release. If the game update is rejected, an accelerated version of the entire process starts again.
* ? Estimated time: Minimum of 1 week to get an approval.
*
o o Note: PC patches do not require manufacturer approvals, but because of the high number of variables in computer hardware and OS configurations, both Phase 1 and Phase 2 require additional time that does not exist on consoles which have standardized hardware. The PC patch development cycle takes about the same amount of time start-to-finish as that of consoles.

Phase 4: Release
* ? Once the game update is approved by both internal QA and the console manufacturers, it gets prepped for release. This is a very short phase, but it can add time to the process depending on a number of variables.
* ? Estimated time: Generally 2-3 days.


That is a high level overview of the patching / update process. Time estimates listed above are averages – it usually takes at least a full month to complete a game update cycle. Often, there are multiple full game updates in the works simultaneously, which is why you see less than a month between full game updates. In some emergency cases, this time can be accelerated, but this is very rare.

The description above outlines the process for publishing permanent game updates and does not apply in the same way to hot fixes. Hot fixes are temporary, server-side fixes that are used to patch in simple adjustments to the game. These are not permanent fixes, and they only apply to online portions of the game. Most significant changes to the game cannot be made with a hot fix.

There you have it – hopefully this removes some of the mystery of the game update and patching process. Enjoy the game.

Very interesting...and figured as much.

Guess we'll need to be patient.

Really hope they pin-point that 'Grain glitch' that's smearing the visuals of Crysis 2 (360)

me too .

This should be a last resort to fix 1 or 2 bugs or do rebalancing for online play, not overhaul a game with countless updates. It shouldnt be a part of the game building process. I pay to play games, testers are paid to test and betas are free to play to test before release. If the product is not ready and working at release then it needs to be pushed back until it is ready. This is standard for any other product from any other industry, the games industry is not a special case.

Also the 1st part of the process should be to address the entire community (not just pc users) with a news update or sticky forum announcement at the very least. Not post 1 comment swallowed deep in a thread that lists the hundreds of issues people are posting about this game which a guy who doesnt even work for Crytek then has to link to it having spent hours filtering through issues to try and report out of his own good will.

Also do not forget that some people do not have internet (for example I have a friend who lives in a black spot for internet expecting it to come through in about 4 months) and they buy this game for the single player. Its AI which is the key part is unacceptably broken and these people will NEVER receive the update.

This should be a last resort. Not a part of the game building process. I pay to play games, testers are paid to test and betas are free to play to test before release. If the product is not ready and working at release then it needs to be pushed back until it is ready.

Normally it isn't.

Hopefully this will calm some of the more active members here down, now that they have a sort of explanation of why a patch takes time. I appreciate that Crytek is working hard to (I hope) to fix the problems, and it may be a while before we see some progress.

But this does not excuse them for releasing a game that clearly was not finished, and then begging us to test, instead of play, their failure.

This should be a last resort. Not a part of the game building process. I pay to play games, testers are paid to test and betas are free to play to test before release. If the product is not ready and working at release then it needs to be pushed back until it is ready.

Normally it isn't.

Hopefully this will calm some of the more active members here down, now that they have a sort of explanation of why a patch takes time. I appreciate that Crytek is working hard to (I hope) to fix the problems, and it may be a while before we see some progress.

But this does not excuse them for releasing a game that clearly was not finished, and then begging us to test, instead of play, their failure.

Exactly my point, it isnt an excuse. They arent a special case from any other industry and again the fact it has taken a user to post this information rather than a member of Cryteks staff to try and address the community is a shameful example of customer service and one of the many reasons I have chosen to take this matter further with trading standards and hopefully a few others will do the same.

Maybe EA forced Cryteks hands (their other games this year have all had the same problems as did FIFA 11 last year) and as I said there are people who dont have the internet who are having this mess thrown at them and they will never receive this update. So hopefully we can do something to get this sell now fix later attitude changed in future by getting something done.

Reporting this situation to trading standards was a pretty easy process really so I do hope people will join in doing it as it will make a difference to the standards of future releases.

This should be a last resort. Not a part of the game building process. I pay to play games, testers are paid to test and betas are free to play to test before release. If the product is not ready and working at release then it needs to be pushed back until it is ready.

Normally it isn't.

Hopefully this will calm some of the more active members here down, now that they have a sort of explanation of why a patch takes time. I appreciate that Crytek is working hard to (I hope) to fix the problems, and it may be a while before we see some progress.

But this does not excuse them for releasing a game that clearly was not finished, and then begging us to test, instead of play, their failure.

Exactly my point, it isnt an excuse. They arent a special case from any other industry and again the fact it has taken a user to post this information rather than a member of Cryteks staff to try and address the community is a shameful example of customer service and one of the many reasons I have chosen to take this matter further.

^this +1

Oh boy. It's this argument again...let's dissect it a bit.

This should be a last resort to fix 1 or 2 bugs or do rebalancing for online play, not overhaul a game with countless updates. It shouldnt be a part of the game building process. I pay to play games, testers are paid to test and betas are free to play to test before release. If the product is not ready and working at release then it needs to be pushed back until it is ready. This is standard for any other product from any other industry, the games industry is not a special case.

How is the game not ready? You can play it from start to finish, there isn't a game-breaking bug, and it's not frying your console, so what's the problem? Saying the game is "not ready" in this day and age because it has a few bugs is like saying that you don't want to pay for a new liver because you'll have to take medicine every day.

If Super Mario Bros.(and Mario had several glitches) had a game-breaking glitch, of course you should get your money back. If Crysis 2 had a game-breaking glitch, of course you should get your money back...but it doesn't. The fact is that Crysis 2's glitches are nothing more than a minor nuisance; a slight inconvenience like subscribing to a NewsPaper service and having the Newspaper boy fling it in your petunias. It's a perfectly good newspaper, albeit a tad brown, but you can still read the snappy comics section.

Also the 1st part of the process should be to address the entire community (not just pc users) with a news update or sticky forum announcement at the very least. Not post 1 comment swallowed deep in a thread that lists the hundreds of issues people are posting about this game which a guy who doesnt even work for Crytek then has to link to it having spent hours filtering through issues to try and report out of his own good will.

Well, now it's not your company now is it? They did address the community with a stick on the main page, they just decided to post it to the PC section. Why should they write it out more than once? You should be happy: if Crytek releases a HDD corrupting patch then the PC players will get it first, warning us not to download it.

But again, the link was posted...on the home **** page.

Also do not forget that some people do not have internet (for example I have a friend who lives in a black spot for internet expecting it to come through in about 4 months) and they buy this game for the single player. Its AI which is the key part is unacceptably broken and these people will NEVER receive the update.

The AI isn't broken. Sure it has random moments where it wigs out but it doesn't hurt the overall experience, and they can still kick you in the shin and make you cry if make fun of them.

The game isn't broken. It's not completely stable, but if given the choice between a few bugs and a better experience...or fewer bugs and back to the days of the original DOOM and Pong, I'm willing to bet my socks that everyone in this forum will choose the former.

Oh boy. It's this argument again...let's dissect it a bit.

This should be a last resort to fix 1 or 2 bugs or do rebalancing for online play, not overhaul a game with countless updates. It shouldnt be a part of the game building process. I pay to play games, testers are paid to test and betas are free to play to test before release. If the product is not ready and working at release then it needs to be pushed back until it is ready. This is standard for any other product from any other industry, the games industry is not a special case.

How is the game not ready? You can play it from start to finish, there isn't a game-breaking bug, and it's not frying your console, so what's the problem? Saying the game is "not ready" in this day and age because it has a few bugs is like saying that you don't want to pay for a new liver because you'll have to take medicine every day.

If Super Mario Bros.(and Mario had several glitches) had a game-breaking glitch, of course you should get your money back. If Crysis 2 had a game-breaking glitch, of course you should get your money back...but it doesn't. The fact is that Crysis 2's glitches are nothing more than a minor nuisance; a slight inconvenience like subscribing to a NewsPaper service and having the Newspaper boy fling it in your petunias. It's a perfectly good newspaper, albeit a tad brown, but you can still read the snappy comics section.

Also the 1st part of the process should be to address the entire community (not just pc users) with a news update or sticky forum announcement at the very least. Not post 1 comment swallowed deep in a thread that lists the hundreds of issues people are posting about this game which a guy who doesnt even work for Crytek then has to link to it having spent hours filtering through issues to try and report out of his own good will.

Well, now it's not your company now is it? They did address the community with a stick on the main page, they just decided to post it to the PC section. Why should they write it out more than once? You should be happy: if Crytek releases a HDD corrupting patch then the PC players will get it first, warning us not to download it.

But again, the link was posted...on the home **** page.

Also do not forget that some people do not have internet (for example I have a friend who lives in a black spot for internet expecting it to come through in about 4 months) and they buy this game for the single player. Its AI which is the key part is unacceptably broken and these people will NEVER receive the update.

The AI isn't broken. Sure it has random moments where it wigs out but it doesn't hurt the overall experience, and they can still kick you in the shin and make you cry if make fun of them.

The game isn't broken. It's not completely stable, but if given the choice between a few bugs and a better experience...or fewer bugs and back to the days of the original DOOM and Pong, I'm willing to bet my socks that everyone in this forum will choose the former.

Eh. It's a little weird that Crytek set up this community, presumably as a method of getting marketing/development intel, and they don't openly address the millions of complaints over the same AI issues. Their "known issues and updates" post details a lot of what's been talked about in these forums, but not the issues with the funky AI.

Actually, I'm saying "AI," but what I really think I mean is that there are major physics glitches or something. You know, like when a CELL soldier has a seizure while standing up after he tries to rally his buddies to come after you. I think the aspect that's actually referred to as "artificial intelligence" is really sophisticated. It looks like the bad guys try to do really smart things when they think you're in the area, but they get hung up on some physics glitch and can't execute.

Anyway, I think what a lot of us want to read is something like "working on a patch to fix the 'running into walls' glitch, stand by" or "a 'running into walls' patch will take us 3 months to produce. can you wait that long?" It's probably anxiety over not knowing what will happen that's pushing a lot of people into their melodramatic outrages.

This thread is informative and I appreciate those who have contributed to it.

But at the same time, I am very disappointed that it is the community that has created it. Not Crytek or EA.

There is a really unprofessional lack of communication surrounding this game. We have folks like Killor117 who is voluntarily compiling lists of bugs found by players and Crytek cannot give us any relevant information.

When people are actively creating threads in the 360 forum saying, "The patch, What did it do?" then you have failed to give out that information clearly. And considering the nature of the bugs found in this game, I do not think patch notes are too big of an ask.

Yes, Crytek should absolutely write it more than once. They should be saturating this very website with the same core message:

"We hear you, we understand there are issues and we are committed to resolving them as soon as possible."

I have not felt Crytek have come out and said this with enough emphasis. Okay so there's a Crysis 2 PC Known Issues and Solutions link on the homepage. It leaves the consoles players scratching their heads and wondering, "Does this apply to me?"

I can understand game development is a stressful and demanding process and that games can unfortunately ship with bugs. It doesn't make it okay, but I have a level of understanding regarding the issue. I can accept it.

But I cannot accept the silence and lack of response from the developer. I would prefer Crytek tell me, "We're sorry, but to fix the majority of the bugs [x,y,z] in this game, on [PC, PS3 or 360], it's going to take a [Month, 2 Months]." than just sit around, hoping and waiting for it to be fixed. Perhaps their reasoning is, they know people will loose their cool if told the "finished" game they just bought wont be completed for another month... But that's a consequence of their own decisions.

I cannot currently play the game how I would like, or how it is intended, due to the bugs present in this build of the game.

This should be a last resort to fix 1 or 2 bugs or do rebalancing for online play, not overhaul a game with countless updates. It shouldnt be a part of the game building process. I pay to play games, testers are paid to test and betas are free to play to test before release. If the product is not ready and working at release then it needs to be pushed back until it is ready. This is standard for any other product from any other industry, the games industry is not a special case.

Also the 1st part of the process should be to address the entire community (not just pc users) with a news update or sticky forum announcement at the very least. Not post 1 comment swallowed deep in a thread that lists the hundreds of issues people are posting about this game which a guy who doesnt even work for Crytek then has to link to it having spent hours filtering through issues to try and report out of his own good will.

Also do not forget that some people do not have internet (for example I have a friend who lives in a black spot for internet expecting it to come through in about 4 months) and they buy this game for the single player. Its AI which is the key part is unacceptably broken and these people will NEVER receive the update.

I know Right its like buying half a car then having them tell you they'll ship out the rest of the parts when they're available.

I would assume

Thats all I needed.