You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
12 points

What’s the problem with day-one patches? I’d much rather have a game with a day-one patch than a game that needs a patch 1 year after its release

Game + day-one patch is essentially the initial state of the game

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

As usual, people have no idea of the complexity of software. Games are extra complex. Games that are meant to run on an infinite variety of hardware combinations are worse. And it’s not any game, it’s an expansive RPG with hundreds of hours of gameplay and paths.

It’s impossible to ship this kind of product bug-free, and it’s quite probable that it will never truly be bug-free. A day-1 patch is obviously expected, and bugfixes in the following weeks mean that devs are closely monitoring how it goes, and are still working full-time on it. That’s commendable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Day one patch means they released an unfinished game. They haven’t done enough testing before physical production. Also fucks over the people with a slow connection.

A patch 1 year after release is fine. Some people found a rare bug which can be fixed. If the game gets patches 1 year or longer after release tells me the developers have love for their game and/or community for fixing it long after they had any obligation to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

A day-one patch is the day of the release, so it counts as included in the release in my books.

It doesn’t mean « they haven’t done enough testing before physical production », it means they took advantage of the inevitable several weeks or months between start of physical printing and release.

And of course a patch 1 year after release is fine. What I’m saying is that I prefer a broken game that is fixed on release day over a broken game that is fixed 1 year later.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

What about a working game instead? They could just delay the launch until they’ve finished what would’ve gone into a day 1 patch before going gold.

If they did that, they could:

  • start working on an expansion
  • give the dev team vacation time as a celebration for going gold
  • start work on the next game
  • do a bunch of play testing to reduce the need for patches a year after launch (i.e. catch more bugs)

In other words, a studio shouldn’t go gold until their TODO list for launch day is done. That should be the standard, and it seems to be what BG3 did.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Why do you prefer broken games at all though? Wouldn’t you prefer a finished game at release?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

my only problem with them is that they can tend to be a bunch of extra data to download, rather that including it in the first download

permalink
report
parent
reply

Games

!games@sh.itjust.works

Create post

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc…
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

Community stats

  • 6.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 80K

    Comments

Community moderators