Have Game Testers Gone Extinct?

[squid5580]

I am a console gamer. I will never be a PC gamer. I am quite content with a controller in my hand playing on my TV. Lets put aside our fanboyisms for just a minute and focus on a problem that effects us all no matter what console you own/love or game(s).

Why is it more and more when I buy a brand new game on the release date it doesn't work properly? Lag, freezing and characters stuck in walls are just a few issues. Some are minor issues and others are game breaking. So you are left with a coaster til they fix the game. Since you can't play it you are left with going to a forum and complaining about the technical issues you are experiencing. Usually to find you are not alone and someone else has already made the same post you were about to. And as you scroll through the posts you will usually find there is gamers who are experiencing the same problem and another camp of gamers saying "wait for a patch that may or may not be coming." And generally defending it. Before I go any further I should mention that this is only directed at a single player game or the single player campaign. MP is a different beast and you never know what may happen when 1 million + people log on and try to play together.

Am I wrong in my belief that a buggy broken game is an unfinished game that should not have hit retailers shelves? That this type of practice is unacceptable in any other vocation so why is game development an exception? Or why the bigger the game (like GTA or Fallout 3) seems to get a free pass because of the size of the world but a linear shorter game doesn't?

And just so I am perfectly clear I am not talking about poor game design choices like repetative missions or a bad camera (bad QTEs probably fit in there as well) but unintentional glitches that hinder the game no matter how good or bad the game could be otherwise.

 

[Anachronism]

Am I wrong in my belief that a buggy broken game is an unfinished game that should not have hit retailers shelves? That this type of practice is unacceptable in any other vocation so why is game development an exception? Or why the bigger the game (like GTA or Fallout 3) seems to get a free pass because of the size of the world but a linear shorter game doesn't?

No, you're absolutely right. Gaming is the only industry where people can get away with releasing an unfinished product, and it's absolutely ridiculous. To be fair though, minor bugs in games like Fallout 3 are forgiveable on occasion, simply because it would take so much time to test everything. That said, they still should test everything.

It's not exactly a new problem, either. If you were unfortunate enough to have bought Daggerfall when it first came out, it would have been impossible for you to complete the main quest until you'd patched it because of a game-breaking bug. It's stuff like this that's truly unacceptable.

And, of course, my pet hate, Battlefield 1942. As good a game as it is, I honestly think it should have been boycotted. Why, you ask? Because it is a multiplayer exclusive game (to all intents and purposes) and unless you downloaded a patch, you couldn't play multiplayer. It's absolutely ridiculous; and, yes, I know the patch was available on release day, but surely they should have just kept it in development for an extra day so they didn't end up releasing an unfinished game?

To sum up: yes, the practice of releasing unfinished games is ridiculous and needs to stop.

 

[Zacharine]

It's not like many game testers, developers and coders have the luxury of choice when it comes to release dates. The longer and longer the game is in development, the more money it consumes, the longer until it produces money and the shorter the time period for it to produce money it has. Because every day you lenghten the testing and de-bugging phase, the day closer someone else will release their competing product, wheater it is next menth or a year from now.

It's the people looking at the money and the figures, not at the product, who decide the release dates.

Why make excellent, when good brings more money. And why waste time to make good, if you can get away with decent. The gamers suffer, hype and crushed expectations are abound and the companies gleefully count every dollar while the developers and coders drink themselves sensless due to shame and underachievement.

 

[IceStar100]

I agree 100%. I still remeber Bully from rockstar for 360. I remember being so ticked off that I spent good money on that game. Then had to wait a week for the patch.

Think what would happen if say Hollywood did this BS. Halfway through the reel just stops. We'd burn the theater down.

 

[pantsoffdanceoff]

What I hate most is when in various RPGs, when you finish a quest, for some reason the NPC doesn't think that you've finished the quest and thus your left totally without a clue of what your supposed to do and can't continue with the game, it seems like a bug that should be easily found enough...

 

[cleverlymadeup]

Am I wrong in my belief that a buggy broken game is an unfinished game that should not have hit retailers shelves? That this type of practice is unacceptable in any other vocation so why is game development an exception? Or why the bigger the game (like GTA or Fallout 3) seems to get a free pass because of the size of the world but a linear shorter game doesn't?

No, you're absolutely right. Gaming is the only industry where people can get away with releasing an unfinished product, and it's absolutely ridiculous. To be fair though, minor bugs in games like Fallout 3 are forgiveable on occasion, simply because it would take so much time to test everything. That said, they still should test everything.

really so i'm guessing you've never ever used any microsoft products? cause frankly they make the games industry look totally flawless and the best coding to have ever existed in comparison, if they did not end of life products there would still be patches coming out for all of their operating systems.

it happens in EVERY industry that bugs and other things happen, look at car recalls or other such recalls.

 

[Lord_Jaroh]

They haven't gone extinct. Companies would rather spend the money on marketing the game and advertising it everywhere rather than fixing the flaws in it. Hype sells, regardless of quality, so you may as well skimp on the quality.

This is why there are pirates, above all other reasons. The games aren't worth the money they are charging for them because of this reason.

 

[Remleiz]

speaking as a former tester, it's not enough for testers to find bugs, the developers need to sort it out and fix them too, and if they dont there's nothing testers can do about it sadly, as they have little say in it ¬_¬

 

[Anachronism]

it happens in EVERY industry that bugs and other things happen, look at car recalls or other such recalls.

Well, yes, I realise that there are always going to be minor bugs and glitches; it's practically impossible to find everything. The point is, even if a car gets recalled, you could still have driven it beforehand. It's the really game-breaking bugs that get overlooked that I think is ridiculous, like my aforementioned BF 1942 one, or the bugs in Daggerfall or The Witcher that prevent you from finishing the main quest. To use another example:

Think what would happen if say Hollywood did this BS. Halfway through the reel just stops. We'd burn the theater down.

 

[mikecoulter]

Game testers test as much as possible, but the industry pushes deadlines too much to allow any proper testing to be done, in some cases.

 

[Twilight_guy]

1. Games are getting more complex and thus have lots of bugs so the chances are higher that some will escape the developers' notice.
2. Developers have a very limited time to produce games and therefor have enough time to make the game (sometimes) but not enough time to test for every single bug. The complexity of some modern games is staggering and its understandable if the developer runs low on time and is forced to stop development before the game has the last layers of polish applied.

 

[Kroker]

I remember Overlord for the Xbox 360. I liked the game but it had so many bugs that I eventually gave up, not to mention the lack of an in-game map, forcing you to rely on one that came in the case. Those two factors meant that I quit playing the game altogether, and I haven't picked it up since, so I don't know if they ever bothered to fix them.

 

[Stegofreak]

2. Developers have a very limited time to produce games and therefor have enough time to make the game (sometimes) but not enough time to test for every single bug. The complexity of some modern games is staggering and its understandable if the developer runs low on time and is forced to stop development before the game has the last layers of polish applied.

While I do agree in principle with your point I'd suggest that there are some issues that could be addressed even before it makes it to testing. For years I've been playing games that suffered from frame drops. Surely at this point developers should have ironed out this flaw! I bought Race Driver GRID last year and had to wait a week for the frame drop to be patched out and today I picked up UFC 2009 Undisputed and hey-presto same problem. Shouldn't we expect these common problems to be sorted out during development by now.

Also, on another note, consider this extreme instance;

I spend my hard earned cash on a new game.
The game in question has some flaw that renders it unplayable.
Rather than lose all the money I forked out, I decide to trade the game in.
Someone else picks up my traded copy of the game.
Game developers complain about the amount of second-hand sales of the game 'cause they're losing money.

If that initial flaw wasn't in there I wouldn't have traded in my copy and that second person might have bought the game new. If devs give us a reason not to trade in the game then surely they'll boost the sales of new copies of the game. Isn't that worth the extra production time?

 

[NeedAUserName]

I hope they aren't, I was planning on becoming one at some point before I go to university/college, to earn a bit of cash...

 

[joystickjunki3]

Game testers are human. Humans make mistakes. Luckily there are these things called "patches."

 

[Stegofreak]

Luckily there are these things called "patches."

Not for people who don't have internet access though.

 

[joystickjunki3]

Luckily there are these things called "patches."

Not for people who don't have internet access though.

True, but that demographic is becoming increasingly less prominent. I'm not saying they don't matter at all, but companies can't cover every base all the time.

The majority of gamers have internet. And if they don't, maybe companies will have some sort of program where you can send in an envelope, or request a delivery, and then you'll receive a disc w/ the patch on it.

 

[Stegofreak]

True, but that demographic is becoming increasingly less prominent. I'm not saying they don't matter at all, but companies can't cover every base all the time.

The majority of gamers have internet. And if they don't, maybe companies will have some sort of program where you can send in an envelope, or request a delivery, and then you'll receive a disc w/ the patch on it.

Optionally all you need is a USB Drive and an Internet Cafe. And now that I've just argued against my own point my head hurts.

 

[sethisjimmy]

I remember listening to the commentaries on half life 2 episode one and two, and hearing about how many play testers played through every part of the game, and even without glitches, valve would spend months just smoothing out things that wouldn't even be considered bumps and would be almost unnoticable in the game. They perfected it beyond belief, and it shows. I guess the rest of the gaming industry has dropped the ball on this one

 

[joystickjunki3]

True, but that demographic is becoming increasingly less prominent. I'm not saying they don't matter at all, but companies can't cover every base all the time.

The majority of gamers have internet. And if they don't, maybe companies will have some sort of program where you can send in an envelope, or request a delivery, and then you'll receive a disc w/ the patch on it.

Optionally all you need is a USB Drive and an Internet Cafe. And now that I've just argued against my own point my head hurts.

Take some aspirin. It's nice to see someone basically concede an argument when they know they're not completely right. I'm not necessarily completely right either, but I'd like to think I can admit when I'm wrong as well.

It might sound like I'm rubbing it in, but I'm really commending you. A lot of people would just argue for the sake of arguing.

It's refreshing that you weren't an asshole is what I'm trying to say.