Not to mention the fact that any day 1 patches fix really obvious issues that should've been noticed and odds are probably were. Having worked in QA at Activision/Blizzard as well I can tell you that at the last build or two around release there tends to be a lot of really obvious issues that the developers just put as, literally, "Will Not Fix" because they either don't have the time or the inclination to fix them. As long as the game functions well enough that you can get from beginning to end the developers tend not to care at that point.You should already know the answer by now. These consoles cost $500 and most of these games are being charged at $70 plus. I prefer the days when the game worked right out of the box. I'm glad patches exist, but it also lets the way of laziness.
Most of the time, patches happen because of the former two, and not the latter "shit just happens". It's a legit complaint and there's no reason to downplay it or act like it's not a huge deal. I will forever call out things like this.
...and because of this, developers made damn sure that any bugs that got left behind weren't very important or noticeable because that was it. They had to work a lot harder to ensure that their games didn't have bugs in them when there was no opportunity to do anything about them.This logic doesn't track thought dude, because before games could be patched, they literally shipped however buggy they ended up and there was nothing they could do about it.
As opposed to now where it's routine to treat early players like unpaid Beta testers because and ship a crappy bug filled game that they had to release day one patches for [sarcasm] because just getting it right the first time is SO difficult.[/sarcasm]
Basically, the industry has gotten incredibly lazy with QA because patches let them just fix after the fact... or just not bother with patches, collect their money, and laugh all the way to the bank.