Yeah your right, they are generally worse than Skyrims launch state and current state.

So true this game is still a mess.

I believe that they don't see it as profitable to pay a worker within Bethesda to work on these serious issues.
And I have this feeling they are becoming more and more like Microsoft and Lionhead.
Compare how Fable 3 started and Skyrim started and how Fable 3 ended and how Skyrim will end, probably with none of these bugs fixed.

You clearly aren't playing on PS3.

on release? How about 9 months later. It is only in the gaming corner of software that such shoddy craftsmanship is tolerated.

Imagine if MS released Excel like this. Or if whenever you looked at certain pictures on your Android half the picture turned black. What if iTunes just accidentally deleted your purchases periodically. Or if your sansa flip stuttered during Jimi Hendrix's solo during "All along the watch tower"

I really don't understand the BDF. Has beth released more patches? Yes. But they have completely ignored 1/3 of the platforms, knowing they sold a broken product at release, and have treated the PC community just marginally better.

two worlds anyone? the "oblivion on steroids" they claimed it was? lets change that statement to most developers dont make games this big with so few bugs compared to other developers who try. and i dont belive Fallout NV was better in any way, experience more bugs with it than skyrim by far and the story could never pull me in beyond getting revenge.

I've got an idea that will save this company lots of time and MONEY in the future. FINISH THE F@#$%^&* GAME BEFORE YOU RELEASE IT!!!!!!

Then I am 99% certain that you won't have to keep making patches.

When I buy tires for my car I buy them new, without any holes. I don't have to wait for people to patch them and they work great. How come with this company everything is backwards?

This is the biggest major issue with Skyrim, if they fix this that would be a pretty good improvement. I really don't get it though It's not like they can't afford to have a few people dedicated to patching the game, and if I was a developer I would not want to be shown up by the community. If they can fix it, so can Beth.


I'm not sure what your playing.. but "most" of the major releases of the last few years have not been worse than Skyrim nor have they been this buggy after 8 months. Granted Skyrim is bigger in size of content than most major release, but that is an excuse.

You can tell how much that care about bugs when they had a beta for Dawnguard last 2 weeks and seemed to fix vary little in regards to reported bugs. I don't care what companies say, you can not have a proper beta in 2 weeks.

They have to make money and they do that by developing new DLC and games, not by making patches. Honestly the only reason game devs patch things -at all- is to keep the fans happy so they buy more games.

Im guessing theres a lot more to item one than meets the cynical eye.

Lets say there are a few major problems with the game but admitting them would be embarrassing, "General memory and stability optimizations" would technically cover such things while remaining tight lipped.

Patches are...like it or not...a big deal now.

Merely 5 years ago had I suggested their importance would be so great that each patch would "Be heralded with a trailer of their own that people would view and discuss in awe" I would have been laughed off the forum...more so than when I did...5 years ago...here...on this forum!

This is a cop out. I am an engineer and you know what happens at the outset of every single project I ever embark on? Feasability and cost anolysis.

If they're not making enough money in returns for their work, they need to 'aim lower' to ensure there are adequate margins.

It is not the consumer's responsibility to svck up their piss poor planning by stuttering along with an unfit product. I think 38 studios is a good example of this, ton of money and many lives screwed, due to [censored] planning at the outset. They invested tons of money and time yet somehow failed to really compute what the returns on those investments were going to be - similarly if producing Skyrim put Bethesda so close to the red they can't afford to properly support the product then that is entirely their own fault.

Does the patch 1.7 fix the Atronach stone preventing the summuning of Atronachs?

Martin

I agree with you Mr. O′Brien.

True there are times when things are fixed and are not reported in the release notes that players have came across.

But it's still embarrassing to them either way. Who reads patch notes? Players that come to the forums and Beth sites, these people know what bugs are in the game anyway as the community has included bug list for them to see them. It would be less embarrassing to be known as the company that fixes a lot of bugs in a patch rather than the a company that just ignores them and hopes it goes away.

And besides, Beth clearly isn't afraid to include a lot of fixes in a patch. Look at Fallout: New Vegas, it included quite a bit of fixes and changes when it was patched. A lot more fixes than Skyrim has gotten in a single patch, however Skyrim has gotten more patches over it's life time.

Heads up...ever time you mention New Vegas you have to publically acknowledge that Obsidian developed it and Bethesda was just the publisher.

Honestly its like "FIRST" in comment fields or something!

In this case it doesn't matter who developed it, Beth still had final say on patching and what fixes got included...

Really? Skyrim is the buggiest game I have bought in the past few years. CoD comes out in better condition, as does, Batman (both games), Prototype 2, Mass Effect 3, Gears of War 3, and pretty much ever other game made by a semi known developer.

How curious, since I bought Skyrim, I have no problems, just a little ctd′s here and there, and mostly caused by mods. Lots of mods.

Clearly I'm one of very few people here who remember the days when games didn't get patches AT ALL. I know that sounds blasphemous now, but yeah kids, there was a time when if your game was broken you just had to deal.

I'm just happy they even are patching it, but I do wish that damn dialogue-breaking bug would get fixed so I can use my mods with a fully patched Skyrim.

Relic entertainment took that route with the Dawn of War series, in that the published details of extensive patch changes. They got heavily slated every patch because of the number of bugs listed that were corrected. This came to a head with Soulstorm where Relic was unable to patch the game AT ALL due to a major design flaw in the game and its DRM system by its contracted developer which took them over 6 months to resolve. They were flayed for months for providing patch details prior to them releasing and the patch not coming or coming with less fixes than listed originally due to tech issues.

With DoW 2 the patch notes slimmed down, none were given out early, major engine changes were lumped in to "stability" and" optimisations" headers.

Its a double edge sword with patches.


Cod is always buggy as hell at launch, with glitchers all over the shop and hackers running around willy nilly. The other games you mentioned also had plenty of issues on release, and with previous versions of the games on various platforms. Epic even stated they would no longer make PC games and only do console titles due to the backlash from the Gears 2 problems and GFWL. Batman was pretty solid, but its based on an engine thats been heavily used across a number of developers and refined somewhat, same with Mass Effect. Refined engines make it a lot easier to develop a game with less issues initially but they still both had plenty of problems on release, Mass Effect 3 having an automatic CTD with its eden prime DLC for instance. As another example, Crysis 2 was a major multi platform game, released to much fanfare and with a huge budget. Its as buggy as hell on all 3 systems and support ended for it less than 4 months after launch.

No game is bug free. On a content per bug ratio, Skyrim aint actually that bad. Its a lot better than some bigger budget titles

Well, they failed at that for me by releasing such a buggy product in the first place. As another poster said earlier, it appears that it's only the gaming industry that this is tolerated in, and it really needs to be put to a screeching halt. People try and make excuses like the size of the game, or deadlines, or publishers and developers not playing nicely, ect. It's all excuses, and does not justify anything. The gaming industry needs to shape up, and start getting responsible.

So your argument is....

We should be grateful to Bethesda, because they're delivering better quality assurance than games that were released in 1995 over 15 years ago.
Seems legit.

Can't say I recognize all the bugs, either, other than the odd color problem of the HD pack DLC. I've had exactly one CTD, and one instance of a mammoth flying up into the sky for no reason whatsoever. 414 hours played, no corrupted save files (a first for a Bethesda game), if anything I'd say this has been the most stable Bethesda release ever.

I understand the frustration from the PS3 camp but honestly the system just sounds like unstable garbage in general. Mine was lousy with all sorts of crashes, freezes and junk ups on the few games I've played, and I frequently hear "OH COME ON!" from my tenant's room as he plays games on his. All anecdotal evidence based solely on personal experience, of course, but as other friends and forumites start posting similar stories I can't help but wonder if the console was never as finely tuned as people wanted to believe.

Take a look at the bug forums, and also look at the size of the USKP. That'll give you a good look at how many bugs there are.

Thing is, even if the PS3 is all buggered up, is it the consumer's fault they released the game for the platform? No. Its just like any other piece of engineering, at the outset you scope the work and perform risk management. anolyze the platforms and determine hardware requirements.

But at any rate, Skyrim, FO3 and FONV are the only games I've ever had my PS3 hard reset from. I'm not somebody with a massive stack of games, I am (was) first and foremost a TES fan and OB plays beautifully on the PS3. ME3, GT5, Uncharted series etc etc can play with no problems.

The most infuriating aspects of Skyrim on the PS3 are 1) the admission it was broke at release and they knew it and 2) they have dropped support for it like a hot rock.

Heh, not much chance at that! As long as they make money they -don't care-. That was my point.

That's not what I said at all. Read it again.