DOA4 patch fixes bugs only?

By GamesIndustry International Published 8 March, 2006

Doesn't fix spiders.

Microsoft has released a mandatory patch for Xbox 360 title Dead or Alive 4 that does not add any extra content to the game but instead merely fixes a number of bugs, in a move which seems to contradict the firm's earlier stance on Xbox Live patching.

According to Microsoft the patch, which is automatically downloaded when DOA4 players log on to Xbox Live, is designed to "prepare your Xbox 360 console for future system and title updates." However, no further details have been revealed, and Microsoft did not respond to requests for comment.

If the patch is indeed designed just to fix bugs and glitches, this could mark the first time that console gamers have had to download such a patch - and may also suggest that DOA4 was released before all bugs had been ironed out. Dead or Alive 4 was originally down to launch alongside Xbox 360 in Japan but did not appear until December 29th, with a European release following on January 27th.

There is also the issue of storing the patch data. For Xbox 360 owners who purchased the hard drive bundle, this won't be a problem - but those who bought the "core" system will need to save the patch to memory card and ensure it is inserted at all times when playing DOA4.

With Microsoft keeping quiet on the subject, the question of whether Xbox Live is now to be used as a means of patching bugged games - as well as offering extra game content and online play - remains unanswered.

Picture of GamesIndustry.

About GamesIndustry International

GamesIndustry International is the world's leading games industry website, incorporating GamesIndustry.biz and IndustryGamers.com.

Read more articles from GamesIndustry by visiting the GamesIndustry International archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (84) Latest comment 6 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Machiavel #1 6 years ago

    Had the (perhaps unwarranted) feeling that DOA4 looked better on my monitor after the patch. Made me look around to see if there were any changes, so finally noticed the gamma control which makes a huge difference to my VGA display! As I doubt that's new, patching just makes me pay more attention to the bloody options.

  • Razzajazz #2 6 years ago

    Okay, so console owners are joing the nightmare world of PC patching, but really, so what? Admittedly what you don't want is lazy coders releasing games before they're finished, but if they are optimising the game (and in DOA4's case, they needed to do SOMETHING with the net code!), surely it doesn't matter, right? Right?!

  • JohnnyWashnGo #3 6 years ago

    I hoped this day would not come but alas, here we are.

    Patching bloody console games.

    FFS whats the bloody big rush to get games out the door?
    Its not like we have nothing else to play.

    Take your time and get it right.

  • [maven] #4 6 years ago

    There has been a dashboard patch for in preparation for "further updates" (wtf?), and a patch for DoA4 (which only fixes the save-game deletion problem AFAIK).
    The article claims these are related. Why is that?

  • reality_cheque #5 6 years ago

    I think we need a 1 thread in the forum for discussions on console patching, to save us having the same conversion every time a patch is released...

    Better patched than crap is my (new) motto.

  • lambtron #6 6 years ago

    "Admittedly what you don't want is lazy coders releasing games before they're finished"

    I think its a bit harsh to suggest that its lazy coders who decide to release a game before everything is polished - its usually due to financial reasons. And to suggest that there have never been any games released on consoles that weren't finished or bug ridden is ridiculous. Its just there wasn't any way to do anything about it in the past. I think this does highlight a flaw in Microsoft's decision to release two flavours of the 360 though. After all the main benefit of developing for consoles (at least in the past and in general) is that you are developing for a known configuration of hardware.

  • Flabio #7 6 years ago

    Didnt the DOA4 patch make some changes to the online mode? Displays your ranking next to your name now, and I don't think it did before.

  • Furbs #8 6 years ago

    The only thing it sorts out is a glitch which has been exploited to enable people climb to the top of the leaderboard. It doesnt affect any of the single player aspect.

    Sadly, exploits and glitches are always going to be a problem with ANY online game, on any format, but its good to see MS/Tecmo respond quickly (cf. EA's delay in response to statpadders in BF2).

    Might I suggest EG/GI.biz read majornelson.com? :p

  • Yawn #9 6 years ago

    Slow news day guys?

    Everybody with Live and Halo 2 knows there were patches before.

    Trying to make a certain company look bad?
    Edited by Yawn at 08/03/06 @ 10:44

  • dbeamish #10 6 years ago

    alledgely a few more patches too like one for King Kong too according to Major Nelson.

  • Darren #11 6 years ago

    It's somewhat ironic that Tecmo delayed the release of Dead Or Alive 4 because they hated having to patch games and yet this is exactly what they're having to do to their game. If I was them I'd sack the games testers because they clearly aren't doing their jobs properly...

  • SimonM7 #12 6 years ago

    The patch addresses balance issues, which is a good thing, and a really weird save game bug. There's nothing about DOA4 that suggests it was rushed, and the save bug does NOT strike you as something that was left in there because the programmers are lazy. The whole profile/guide thing is pretty difficult to wrap your head around since it's a new concept, and there are other games that show some funky behavior in regard to that feature.

    But of course it's more fun to bash the 360 and make this about CONSOLE GAMES - NOW BEING BUG TESTED AFTER RELEASE! YAY!

    Hrm.

  • Nige #13 6 years ago

    >If the patch is indeed designed just to fix bugs and glitches, this could mark the first time that console gamers have had to download such a patch

    Nonsense. This has already happened several times in the past. Bugs get out into the real world, no matter how well something gets checked. You can have 100 testers working for months on a title, when it gets into the hands of 50,000 people - somebody is going to find a bug. Anybody who claims otherwise does not live on planet Earth.

    So once this bug is found, it seems like the Eurogamer suggestion is to ignore it, because you shouldn't patch console games?

  • OllyJ #14 6 years ago

    maybe they can Fix Ninja Gaiden too.

  • Ninjamagic #15 6 years ago

    The days consoles have patches is the day you sell your soul to the devil!!

    This was always the unique contributing factor in making console games different.

    And with microsoft doing it for their OWN games, expect this to be a "Green Light" for every other publisher out there to do also the same. The message is this:

    "You have full permission to release a patch for a game, if you are on a tight schedule/block buster is coming/ competing against PS3/ Q4 figures/ Shareholders"

    XBOX 360 allows you to patch games.

    Immediately your "pysche" for coding and bug fixing changes (consoles were one area you coudlnt budge on. if a bad bug got in you had to re-manufacture the disk at the cost of millions).

    This in turn, turned the programmers heads into "serious mode" when doing a PS2 game, however when they did a PC game.

    They couldnt give a monkeys.

    Release a game 87% complete (buggy). It takes 3 weeks to make and stock and shelve and manufacture the disk.

    In 3 weeks time we will have a patch in store, for you to download.

    Well done MSOFT. You goons.

    Good thing i havent bought a 360. Any console mfr worth its salt would be embarrased patchiing its games.

    But then i did say you sell your soul to the devil the day you done it - and its Microsoft were talking about here =)

  • SimonM7 #16 6 years ago

    God this'll get annoying.

    *Flees comments thread*

  • Furbs #17 6 years ago

    Ninjamagic, download a Snes or Megadrive emulator. Then look to see how many v1.0, v1.1 and v1.2 ROM's there are. Or maybe on the NES/SMS. Its been going on for yeeeeeeeeeeears.

    If games are routinely coming out with showstopping bugs, they wont sell, simple as that.
    Edited by Furbs at 08/03/06 @ 10:52

  • peterfll #18 6 years ago

    I think one of the major differences between patching 360 games and patching PC games is the storage issue. PCs have hard drives so patches aren't so much of an issue in terms of storage, but MS decided not to make the 360 HD compulsory. So if you've got a memory card, its a bit rich to expect that people should be using it to store 'compulsory' patches.

  • Rambaldi #19 6 years ago

    I have holes in my jeans. I'm hoping that if I play my 360 for long enough, they'll get patched too ;)

  • bionutz #20 6 years ago

    ah come on! this is not a pc-patch nightmare: it's automatically installed the way Blizzard is doing with the Diablo2, etc. And, tbh, things are becoming so complex nowadays that is very very hard to test some piece of software thoroughly, unless the processes involved are simple. Sometimes customer input is the best testing that can be had.

  • Furbs #21 6 years ago

    But its only for online purposes. I'd imagine anyone who has a gold membership has an HDD, or plans to get one anyway.

    The Core package is primarily aimed at the casual gamer who is particularly budget conscious. The casual gamer probably wont use Live.

  • Nige #22 6 years ago

    For the first time in console history, a licensor (Microsoft/Sony) can force publishers to FIX titles with issues that previously they would have washed their hands of due to the logistics of deploying an update. I fail to see why this is a bad thing.

    Everybody who connects to the Xbox live service is forced to accept the patch in order to sign in. It's a level playing field, with minimal user impact.

    Find something else pointless to whine about gentlemen.

    (And PS3 fanboys, rest assured that provisions will be made to allow exactly the same thing - when the online platform is FINALLY spec'd up. Hopefully it will work just as well as this system).

  • lambtron #23 6 years ago

    It already happened, there are some PS2 online games where you download patches to your memory card ... its just so few people play PS2 online there's probably hardly anyone who knows about it ;).

  • paulf #24 6 years ago

    It seems that most things XBOX 360 were rushed so this isn't a real surprise, however if it makes the game work better I dont see the problem (apart from those who bought the game and dont have access to the patch)

  • Furbs #25 6 years ago

    If you dont have access to the patch, you wont need it, simple as that.

  • ralphwolfenstein #26 6 years ago

    If there was a critical flaw in the single player game that required a patch to fix then this would be a significant story – but no more significant than the infrequent cases we get of entire batches of console games being faulty and needing to be replaced physically. It happens from time to time. All console games ship with known bugs, although only a fraction of them critical - MSR being one of the worst offenders ever. (Not necessarily due to a bug but possible manufacturing error – i.e. wrong master used). I’d rather have had the option to patch that rather than go through the palaver of swapping the disc over via Sega’s support… But let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that the patch is essential to the offline game - it would be a landmark story if it were the true that this was the first time a gamer was offered the option to swap the disk or patch it online, if only because it represented a choice for the consumer – but that’s not even true either. It’s happened to WrestleMania 21 in the States.

    Interestingly though, the story provided no indication of what ‘bugs’ were actually fixed. I’ve not connected my home 360 to live yet, but I’ve not noticed any issues with DOA4. As far as I can see it’s a polished (albeit crap), finished game. Maybe the patch fixes the crapness?

    But if it’s online stuff that’s being fixed then what’s the issue? Tons of Xbox games were patched to lock out cheat exploits – MotoGP, Halo 2 etc. Even PSO on the Dreamcast got updated from time to time. The point about needing a memory card permanently plugged in is off target, as I can’t imagine there are many Xbox Live players without the hard drive anyway, what would be the point? The difference between the core and full system was basically an online-ready one, and the ‘vanilla’ version for people without broadband

    Oh and Ninjamagic – you obviously have no understanding of how the development process, 1st party approval, or indeed our industry actually works. It be commercial suicide for MS to allow its publishers to assume they can patch games because of the impact this would have on the mass market’s confidence in the machine – which is why MS’s submission and approvals process is just as strict as any other 1st party’s. To think otherwise is just wrong

    The story could equally be, ‘Publisher gives a shit about its games post release…’

  • smoison #27 6 years ago

    If releasing unfinished games become standrad on consols, it will not make ocnsol's more popular.

    This is reason enough to NEVER put a HD on a consol.

  • Xerx3s #28 6 years ago

    In the old days buggy console games where launched before they where done and left alone. The only thing that changed is that they iron out the bugs afterwards, not a bad thing id say.

  • Furbs #29 6 years ago

    smoison, why dont you try reading things before posting?

  • smoison #30 6 years ago

    Again, I would infinetly prefer they test games ENOUGH before releasing them, makieng sure it worked ok and then accept they will NEVER be able to change what they release

  • lambtron #31 6 years ago

    Great so games would never ever ever be released then. Great idea!

  • Nige #32 6 years ago

    >If releasing unfinished games become standrad on consols, it will not make ocnsol's more popular.

    >This is reason enough to NEVER put a HD on a consol.

    If releasing unfinished sentences becomes standard on forums, it will not make posters more popular.

    This is reason enough to NEVER put a keyboard in the hands of the [insert relevant insult here]

    (Sorry - you left me a VERY open goal there) :-)

  • Furbs #33 6 years ago

    So smoison, can you give me an online game in the last 5 years that has never needed to be patched?

  • smoison #34 6 years ago

    Nice seeing the Xbots feeling insecure about their consols....

    Its Okay, its not quite a PC, but not quite a consol either...

  • lambtron #35 6 years ago

    Hmm you don't quite seem to be following the point of this argument - it has nothing to do with a particular platform. Good way to attempt to deflect from the actual fact that you were completely wrong tho....

  • Furbs #36 6 years ago

    Wheres the insecurity? You're the "hardcore" PC gamer who posts in every 360 thread.

    So come, gimme a game that hasnt needed a patch (even if one was not released).

  • smoison #37 6 years ago

    Do they patch DS online games?

    And every PC game has been patched because PC game are released UNFINISHED. Hence my point about the Hard Drives

  • Furbs #38 6 years ago

    So are the DS games guaranteed 100% bug free then?

  • AtomicBanana Verified Level Designer, Playground Games #39 6 years ago

    'Nice seeing the Xbots feeling insecure about their consols....

    Its Okay, its not quite a PC, but not quite a consol either...'

    I'm sorry, I can't take you seriously, you can't even spell a word that is a major part of your argument. On top of that, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about - I don't even need to provide a counter argument, you're doing a good job of that yourself so far :)

  • Ninjamagic #40 6 years ago

    There are so many contradictions on here its hard to keep up.

    SNES game and etc... yes had different roms, barely noticeable between territories PAL They did it successfully and only on the emulator scene - did you get to see the differences.

    1 thing. I am no fan-boy , expect leaning a bit on PC. So if anything i am more critical because of being from this area.

    I have HL2 and STILL cant play it properly because of the D3D Bug error (if you have a 2gig RAM and its split into sticks and not single).

    Valve says "P*** off its Microsofts Direct X fault" (or akin to this)

    Microsoft says "u* y**rs its in this file fix (have to be a quantum physicst to go through the help forums and try their 3 million "trial and errors" to get to the problem.

    POINT? I have a game i can only play for 1 hour max before it crashes to desktop. Am i fuming - of course? I have to patch it and patch it and patch it.

    Consoles were the last "free domain" where you damn well knew if you played the game it would be the same with no/lesser crashes".

    This isnt about "Bug free" games. You cannot have bug free games and if you did, you would be richer than Bill Gates selling your theories to NASA and fixing their space shuttle bugs?

    Whats it about then. Well basically this:

    Microsoft opening the floodgates for console gaming to be patched as "the norm".

    Take a look at COD 2 as a classic example of another publisher following suite.

    COD 2 made in tandem with 360 and PC and it was obvious it would be a nigh on high end PC port.

    And lo and behold it has the same problems as a PC (roughly) game. Patches, online issues, bug fixes etc...

    Aside from odd online stuff on dreamcast (where it really was the exception, if you list 1 game with a patch i could list 20 that didnt have one).

    Now its patch after patch on COD2, on Dead or Alive 4 - Guaranteed on your next title.

    Look at all the complaints on XBOX LIVE play on both products above.

    The point is this: Before it was said "OK we cant release that its too buggy" now its "Doesnt matter, we'll patch it".

    Who is the one who gets messed about? Second rate products, massive bugs can now go through (we will promise to give a patch to make x y z on level 50 to work in the end. it only works 1 out of 10 at the moment.

    Ultimately , who loses out? The consumer. The person buying the game, because they are getting a lesser experience for their money.

    Whereas before this wouldnt be acceptable, now it is.

  • Nige #41 6 years ago

    >Do they patch DS online games?

    It's a reasonable question, but put it this way... I'd rather write a test plan for a DS game than a 360 game.

    In the same way that there are probably less product recalls on skateboards than there are on cars; the levels of complexity are streets apart.

  • Ninjamagic #42 6 years ago

    This is a bad decision for consumers. Bad decision for games players and its not about the testers as someone mentioned here.

    I put my right arm there is a gigantic bug reports for both COD and DO4 from the testers saying "online is poo, this bug etc...." however tight schedules, release dates and shareholders win out.

    Who gives them this power?

    Patches.

  • Furbs #43 6 years ago

    No, the patches in SNES games were to fix bugs behind the scenes, it wasnt just PAL/JAP/US differences. EVERY game has minor bugs. No matter how small, they're there. This "patch" is designed to make the online aspect better because people are exploiting a bug which otherwise was no consequential. The fact this fix came out so soon is a good thing, and is not about patching the single player part at all.

    Heres one for you explaining why online is so tough to test...this is from a Ghost Recon preview...

    "Glitches are here to stay. Dodger33 asked a great question “How do glitches get into the game?” Apparently the average map (in a Red Storm game) gets something like 400 man-hours of testing before release. Yes, you read that right, the equivalent of one person playing just that map for 8 hours a day for 50 days. This person looks for glitches and errors during this time. In the first 30 days on LIVE the average map gets something like 400 man-YEARS of play time. This is why the public can find glitches that the developers cannot possibly discover in the amount of time it takes to get a game to production. On top of that certain aspects of LIVE play cannot be replicated. The way that massive amounts of people interact over a myriad of real-life internet connections cannot be reproduced and analyzed pre-launch."

    Make sense?

  • Nige #44 6 years ago

    Ninjamagic - on the PC, I'd agree with you... but when a licensor like Sony or Microsoft is involved, it's a different ball game.

    Both must know by now that patches are a PR own-goal, and neither will allow you to muscle a bug through certification with a view to patching it after it ships.

    It's still early days for 360, and games that are shipping now have gone through most of their development with non-existent hardware. If the situation doesn't improve then it may be a topic worth revisiting, but right now we don't even know what was fixed (it could've been a massive security vulnerability) - so complaining about it seems a bit futile.

  • kangarootoo #45 6 years ago

    Can I clear a few things up regards the release of games, just for those making gospel statements like they have a clue (for my own venting benefit as much as anything else).

    1. Coders don't decide when a game gets released (for the person who said the coders were lazy for releasing the game).

    2. QA departments do not decide which bugs get fixed and which optimisations get made (for the person who said he would sack the QA dept).

    3. Delaying the release of a game means the cost of developing it goes up. Unless you don't actually do anything with the extra time, but then what would be the point (for the person who suggested the game should be delayed because we all have stuff to play int eh mean time).

    Man, its becoming a busy week for my pedantic dev defending efforts.

  • sdvksbhv #46 6 years ago

    This is not a surprise at all. Online play gives rise to bugs that could never have been tested with a handful of testers. And if they did exist clearly from the start this is 99% not down to lazy coders, but lazy testers! example, King Kongs Gamma levels which they have also now corrected with a patch!

    People better start getting used to it as it's here to stay, and yes PS3 will have them too Eurogamer!!!

  • lambtron #47 6 years ago

    @Nige and Kanga

    Two reasoned, well constructed posts. Congrats ;)

  • stoob #48 6 years ago

    The day I dreaded seems to have arrived courtesy of M$. The reason why I stopped gaming on the PC platform, yes the dreaded scenario of rushing out half finished games and requiring to dl patch after patch to make it work properly. I have no interest in mutliplayer gaming and no interest in xboxlive, what are M$ proposing to do? Issue patch discs via the post or leave gamers with shoddy products?
    Roll on the PS3, hopefully PS will value its punters more

  • Furbs #49 6 years ago

    Yeah damn right stoob. Since I bought my PSP I've been well impressed with Sonys support of issues and optional firmware upgrades. They've been really great about it, especialy in their bug fixing. And Sony treat their customers with so much more respect - Their rootkits and DRM leanings are proof of that.

    Are stupidity levels on the rise or am I just getting smarter?

  • Nige #50 6 years ago

    >Roll on the PS3, hopefully PS will value its punters more

    Can anyone say DRM? or DRM Patch?

    LOL

  • morriss #51 6 years ago

    @Furbs - A bit of both

  • Ninjamagic #52 6 years ago

    @nige & furbs

    You posts makes a lot of sense but they have some components missing.

    You can have interent emulation software which depicts "real world" scenarios, it costs thousands of pounds and would help with the Ghost Recon analogy.

    Wouldnt get ALL the bugs, yes , but as i said. If you could find a way of rooting out all bugs, trust me the bugs in the NHS life-saving equipment/Nasa space shuttles win out and you would be literally- a billionaire (think of all the software programes, you are effectively cutting QA which could never be done).

    All our analogies involved online gaming, something not prelavent in the SNES days etc... so yes this is new and it looks like its going to boom even more.

    So whats the solution? Whats left?

    Well BETA tests are already in place to spot these bugs, so they CAN be spotted well before joe public gets it. Including on Ghost Recon.

    A typical game could get what 1000 Beta Testers? Thats a huge amount of information and "test hours". However it is limited to what?

    Time? Do you want to Beta Test for 1 week or 3 months to root out all your bugs?

    Again release dates/shareholders and Q4 results win out.

    My danger is this, as MS got the ball rolling (OK on a big stage as opposed to the Snes days where, i couldnt even notice if it was a different rom or not until the Emulation scene came out).

    if MS did it, and the CONSUMERS ACCEPT IT.

    Then Sony might think "Aha, well we might aswell" and then Ninty might come on and think "OK they got away with it too"

    its not about fan boys, if any sony guys are sniggering at this 360 episode of patching, trust me if the PS3 has a HD and online (which it will wont it) and the console playing public think its "OK". Then expect it on your system.

    Period.

    Ultimately, its all about "Lowering the bar of acceptable quality" for something that is £29.99/£34.99".

  • Teeth #53 6 years ago

    "Period."

    OUT, HEATHEN SWINE

  • ralphwolfenstein #54 6 years ago

    Whats it about then. Well basically this:

    Microsoft opening the floodgates for console gaming to be patched as "the norm"

    Ninjamagic – I can see your concerns, but as has been pointed out by others, the laws of competition make this ‘nightmare scenario’ extremely unlikely

    As a brand objective, Microsoft is desperate to shrug off the connotation that Xbox is a PC in a box. They have done everything to make the Xbox experience a smooth, plug-and-play one. As a publisher who has deal with the MS approval process, I can tell you that their QA benchmark is as strict as it has ever been, and in-line with other 1st parties. An Xbox Live ‘patch’ as the term is understood by the PC community is utterly undesirable to both Microsoft and the game’s publisher. It is not an option that is considered when releasing a game. If your game has critical bugs, it will fail QA - end of story

    No one has even been able to confirm what this DoA4 patch actually does yet – as I stated before, the game is (in my experience) as flawless as you could expect from a console game (albeit a dog to play and a further step back from the glory of DoA2 - IMHO of course)

    I think your fears are misguided – it’s not helped by disingenuous reporting, or scare mongering morons like stoob chipping in with dumb-ass comments. The console manufacturers will aggressively try and protect the ‘works right out of the box’ advantage they have over the PC market because it remains a key point of difference

  • dudefella #55 6 years ago

    All I hope is that this doesn't encourage console developers to become lazier with development and bug-testing because they can patch it anyway. It's kind of a double edged sword though, because let's say that a game gets tested all to hell and a game gets released, when the developers think it's practically bug-free. What if players find a bug anyway, should the developer NOT patch it even though they can, because of XBL and all that?

  • Furbs #56 6 years ago

    A testing beta software isnt going to be much good in finding glitches in the final code is it?

    If the Xbox didnt have the ability to update, this minor "glitch/bug/lazy programming" whatever would have been left. Period.

    Is that a good thing?

  • ralphwolfenstein #57 6 years ago

    All I hope is that this doesn't encourage console developers to become lazier with development and bug-testing because they can patch it anyway

    It won't. For all the reasons given above

  • Ninjamagic #58 6 years ago

    I take all your comments on board.

    I disagree vehemently that this is a good thing.

    Furbs - if BETA code isnt a reflection on final code then thats a big worry. It uses the same code-base.

    In fact beta code can be ABC123 and 39 bugs

    With beta testing it is the same ABC123 without the 39 bugs.

    So doing Beta tests is vital to spot code before it goes final. Its down to the progammer, if he is good enough and competent enough. Good solid long beta testing elminates the majority of online bugs.

    I bet you MSOFT didnt have an extensive online Beta test of Dead or Alive 4 or COD. Why?

    Cos it was bleeding knackered!(the code base) and even if they wanted to, they probably couldnt - bar your usual 8 testers in a room lets link up for 3 weeks etc... This is why the games are patched.

    if they were Beta tested with thousands of hours put in, they wouldnt have been.However again release dates and xmas rush for 360 won out(obviously).

    I agree msoft will want to keep it "quiete" also with ralphs comments there normal QA will still be very strict. But, well they have failed if they think they gonna make me think 360 is different to PC.

    Hard Drives.
    Patches.
    Overheating power supplies.

    Who are they trying to fool, its everything a PC is except in name only...

  • Furbs #59 6 years ago

    Ninjamagic, do actually have anything to back that up? Or are you just going to keep on inventing things to suit your perspective? I've provided a comment from a Ubi Dev who shows exactly how much testing goes on.

    Yeah, final code will evolve out of beta code, but you're naive if you're saying that from that there will be no bugs or (as is more relevant - a point most people are missing) exploits are there when it becomes "final".

    Any code which is revised will be susciptable (albeit at a reduced level) to "bugs". You could test a game for 5 years and could still miss something that some brightspark online notices or encounters. Do not underestimate the human ability to use untried methods.

    Oh and if that definition makes it a PC, then is my a PSP a PC in all but name? I have a writable storage device (flashcard), an optical drive, an OS, and its frequently patched.
    Edited by Furbs at 08/03/06 @ 15:21

  • SeesThroughAll #60 6 years ago

    Ninjamagic, even the PS3 will have firmware updates (which also qualify as patches), FFS. What's the big deal about a console game getting patched?
    Edited by SeesThroughAll at 08/03/06 @ 15:27

  • Ninjamagic #61 6 years ago

    Its best if i didnt speak of my heritage.

    Lets leave it at that.

  • Furbs #62 6 years ago

    So you're saying you work in the industry? Do you work for the company that made Boiling Point? That would explain your anxiety about the lack of testing.

    Zomg! Did you work with Derek Smart?

  • reality_cheque #63 6 years ago

    Jesus, I really hope there isn't a limit to the number of people I can put on my ignore list.

    Ninjamagic... *plonk*
    smoison... *plonk* (although I don't know why I didn't ignore your retarded ass long ago, maybe I needed to feel superior last time I paid attention to your dribbling)
    stoob... *plonk*

    Don't worry, you'll have plenty of friends in my Pit o'Ignore, Darren has been in there for about 3 months making the place all comfortable - padded walls and the like. I've even sent down a cardboard box with PS3 written on the side, just for the Sony Fanboys who think that Sony won't be doing the same.

    @Furbs: "Are stupidity levels on the rise or am I just getting smarter?"
    Sorry to burst your bubble mate, but it's definitely the first option :p

    Obviously all these people like playing games with bugs in :)
    Edited by reality_cheque at 08/03/06 @ 15:41

  • Xerx3s #64 6 years ago

    "Nice seeing the Xbots feeling insecure about their consols....

    Its Okay, its not quite a PC, but not quite a consol either..."

    To me, it sounds like your the one who feels a bit insecure. Trying to make a big deal out of everything. :\

    As for console patching, it isnt new. This has been happening for ages. Hell, even the 2600 had patched games (impossible mission i.e.). Except, now they are actually capable of patching the crap when its already released and not screwing over early buyers by only patching later printed discs.

  • smoison #65 6 years ago

    Well said Ninjamagic,

    But in the end, obvisously a patched game will(should) work better, and if there was a BUG its better its fixed.

    The only point we were trying to make was this will only become more and more standard, and half finished games (like Battlefeild 2!) will be normal even on consols.

    Some of us just take this kind of news as a bad sign.

  • Furbs #66 6 years ago

    No it wont, because a) consoles have a standard hardware and b) unlike the PC, consoles have an external certification process. The PC version BF2 for instance, did not need to go through to MS prior to launch, it was only EA's QA team who had look.

    Is that really so hard to grasp? Or again, did you not read most of the posts?

  • ralphwolfenstein #67 6 years ago

    c'mon Furbs et al. Let's take off and nuke this thread from space. It's the only way to be sure

  • Mephistopheles #68 6 years ago

    NOT the first time. COD2 was patched over Live to fix the save-game bug. Also, this "patch" does a lot more than fix bugs. examples: remembers last character and stage you picked online, displays rank next to name in fights, optional reset of your rank, resets survivial and time attack leaderboards etc.
    Quite a misleading article if you ask me,

  • Furbs #69 6 years ago

    /gives in and heads back to planet reality.

  • lambtron #70 6 years ago

    rofl @ ralphwolfenstein

  • reality_cheque #71 6 years ago

    @Furbs: /gives in and heads back to planet reality

    I have my own planet? Awesome!

  • Hunam85 #72 6 years ago

    Didnt knights of the old republic get a patch on the 1st box?
    Edited by Hunam85 at 08/03/06 @ 16:54

  • HelloWorld #73 6 years ago

    If the "patch" just closes some loophole in the online mode then that's OK- it's not like an error in the code- more a detail that was overlooked. I'd say it was more of an upgrade than a bug fix.

    It is a bit worrying that people might not feel pressed to get it right the first time if they can patch stuff later, but people won't stand for that shit. I also agree that having two version of the 360 is not the best idea. It's a bit of a deterrent to me buying one.

    I hope consoles can take on some of the good bits of PC games- like mods, and none of the bad bits- like how they never fucking work.

  • MrGrumpy.au #74 6 years ago

    "If the patch is indeed designed just to fix bugs and glitches, this could mark the first time that console gamers have had to download such a patch"

    Ahem... As several people have mentioned before the PS2 was being issued game patches online back in '04. Having a quick look at one of my online memory cards shows SOCOM 2 and Star Wars: Battlefront as having been patched (they take up almost the entire card!).
    These patches didn't add any content to the original games they were also (like the DOA4 patch) just bug fixes.

    Patching is certainly alive and well (unfortunately?) on consoles.

    Edit: Fixed spelling etc.
    Edited by MrGrumpy.au at 08/03/06 @ 21:09

  • Virgil #75 6 years ago

    It's a worrying idea to think that microsoft are releasing titles that are not ready and this shows a slight glimer of hope on part of nintendo. Twilight princess has been delayed so that the game is the best it can be and nwont dissapoint like wind waker seemed to.

    At the same time though at least something has been done to fix what was broken. If Microsoft would simply say, "yes, the game was bugged but now its fixed" i would be happy. It's the denial that gets to me.

  • thefilthandthefury #76 6 years ago

    Mephistopheles is spot on. The patch adds a few nice little features. The game feels better for it.

    Bring on the patches I say. Better that games get fixed than sit there left to rot in a buggy hell.
    Edited by thefilthandthefury at 09/03/06 @ 01:58

  • Genji #77 6 years ago

    Console games shouldn't be a buggy hell. They're supposed to be a haven from the buggy hell we get on the PC.

  • smoison #78 6 years ago

    Amen

  • smelly #79 6 years ago

    Gawd. Console in game patching horror.

    That's it, im deffo not getting a 360 now.

    And thats even if something decent comes out on it which isnt available on pc.

  • Teeth #80 6 years ago

    Do yourself a favour and side with the people talking sense.

  • Ninjamagic #81 6 years ago

    No one has a monopoly on that mester.

    End of the day were all pawns

    I agree with Smoison and as for reality cheque

    /who?

  • ralphwolfenstein #82 6 years ago

    FOR F**** SAKE PEOPLE, let's go through this for the last time

    Console games are not a buggy hell because consoles represent a common hardware platform - unlike PC's. Console games have to pass a 1st party test before they are approved for release (PC games don’t). Microsoft’s submission process is the equal of any company’s. That's why generally speaking console games are, and will continue to be, un-buggy

    The ability to patch games via Xbox Live will not change the strictness of the initial QA process. It is in no-one's interest to release a buggy game on the assumption that you can patch it afterwards. That is commercial suicide. Companies do not actively seek to commit commercial suicide if they can help it (although they often do it by accident – say hello Acclaim/Atari etc). Console games will not be released 'unfinished' because of Xbox live any more than they have been released unfinished throughout gaming history (Dr3ver - ahem)

    In the DOA4 case, no-one is apparently even able to confirm what bugs there are in the offline game that the patch fixes, or even if they are any. From what I can see, DOA4 is one of the more polished, less buggy 360 games to date

    It's a misleading and downright deceptive article trying to force and issue out of nothing. It's scare mongering to those of you who clearly don't work in the industry, and are too stupid to grasp the logic being put before you. The 360 and Xbox Live will not play host to ‘unfinished’ games any more than any other console in history has

    You can be sure that PS3 online games will be patched as frequently, if not more. I would argue ‘more’ given Sony’s inexperience in the online arena

    This DOA4 patch is neither a precedent, nor a portent of things to come - according to other posters here, the most patched console game to date is actually a Sony one. Sadly Sony neglected to provide PS2 owners with a hard drive, so that's £20 of memory card you need to have your game 'fixed.' Thanks Sony. I didn't read about that on EG though

    And just in case anyone didn’t catch the sarcasm in the last post, I don’t think EG is biased towards Microsoft – that’s a rather stupid assertion if anyone’s ever made it – generally any criticism they make is well founded. On this occasion though I think they got it wrong, and the downright retarded responses from some people in this thread is the clearest illustration of why ‘journalists’ have a responsibility to get it right

    If you really need to justify your existence by sticking the boot in Microsoft, talk about the 360’s reliability or lack thereof. Mine was dodgy when I bought it, and it’s finally packed up after a mere two weeks. The piece of shit.

  • Teeth #83 6 years ago

    LISTEN to ralphwolfenstein

    If you've got a chip on your shoulder and need to hate the 360 for something, patching games so that they work properly is not a good excuse.

  • Ninjamagic #84 6 years ago

    That was a good peice Ralph

    I didnt say i disagreed with you totally.

    My own point was basically it is "open to abuse" from t@tty publishers who are at the mercy of release dates and shareholders. I also mentioned Sony would do this and Ninty if both did a lot of it, and i sympathise with your 360 episode, which in one of my posts earlier clearly said power pack was poo/dodgy (comparing it to PC).

    /Gives paracetamol to him