August 12th has come and gone and many of us have played Madden 09 in some way or form by now. In fact, on the PS3 the 1st patch has already made its rounds to those who have internet access. Wait a minute... The game has just been released, and there is a patch for it? There is also a 2nd patch announced too?! A lot of people see it as great news since the developers are fixing any mistakes that the community has found with their games. But are patches really a great thing for gaming?
Life With/Without Patches
How did gamers survive without patches in the gloomy days of previous generations? I believe developers in the previous generations knew they had one shot to get a game right. If there was a possible glitch or bug in a game that could render the game unplayable, then they knew that word would get around and the game wouldn't sell. Thus, development teams were more thorough and more careful to make sure to release a more polished game.
Am I saying that developers are simply not trying as hard as those of yesteryear? No, I am saying that they now have a crutch to lean on in times of trouble when a bug threatens a release date. If they have a deadline to reach, then they can simply extend what they needed to finish into a patch and release the game before then even if it's broken.
Another thing that makes me irritated when talking about patches is the fact that a lot of gamers are not getting a quality game.
One recent game that seemed to follow this example was the game MLB 2k8 (2k8) for the PS3 and the XBOX 360. 2k8 was already under enough pressure being the sole sim baseball videogame for the XBOX 360 and when it was released, it immediately came under fire from the community. The frame rate that shipped in the retail version was beyond abysmal. One would be lucky enough to actually throw the pitch they wanted to or even swing the bat remotely close to the ball thanks to the frame rate.
After the release of the game it seemed almost coincidental that the developers immediately knew what the consumers were talking about and told everyone in a press release that a patch was already underway. Did this mean 2K Sports already knew the frame rate was terrible, but had to ship the game the way it was?
Another thing that makes me irritated when talking about patches is the fact that a lot of gamers are not getting a quality game. What I mean by this is not everyone has access to the internet from their video game console. What happened to the people who ran out and bought 2k8 on release day, only to never realize beforehand a patch was already in development to fix the terrible frame rate? It just seems like the "casual" gamer will never get the same experience as the person who has Xbox Live or the one connected to Playstation Network. I really feel for those with limited access to the Internet who just want a solid video game in this day and age.
Are patches really all they are cracked up to be?
I feel in order to be truly satisfied in this generation of games, gamers are going to need a patch to fix a certain area or areas of a game.
Something else that seems to be overlooked is the QA staff in gaming companies. There should be fully committed staff workers who do nothing, NOTHING but test the game in every single way the game can be played: Practice, create-a-player, online, tournaments, etc. This may seem like such an easy task to perform, but as MLB 2k8 and NCAA 09 have shown us, testing games must be taken for granted at these companies. If it wasn't, how could such big bugs such as the frame-rate issues in MLB or the roster glitches in NCAA have come to pass?
So from a gamer's perspective, is this a good thing for gaming? I feel in order to be truly satisfied in this generation of games, gamers are going to need a patch to fix a certain area or areas of a game. NCAA Football 09 was recentely released, and now the developers have come out and told us about two planned patches, one of which has been released already. This is also an example that of what could be the main problem with patches: developers are now coming out to the community and subtly admitting that there are problems with the games they put out, and that there are fixes already on the way. Hearing this only makes me wonder more about how effectively these games are tested, and in general these actions make it look as if developers have rushed to get the game out on time.
What do you think? Are patches causing developers to push back fixes for games and ship us broken products or should we be grateful that we can now get fixes for games we never could before? Chime in and play nice!