When a Patch is Just Too Late to Save a Game

[PRGUY85]

This was a something that could have benefited an awful game like Don King Presents: Prizefighter...

[markprior22]

I am in total agreement with the OP. When it comes to sports titles that are released every year, timing is everything. If it takes 2 months for a patch to be released, I'm probably way past having any interest in playing. More beta testing from people like those on OS would be a great help. Most people would gladly do it for a free copy of the game. Many would do it for free. If these companies won't do this, it only leads me to believe one thing. They are already aware of the problems and just don't have time to fix them before release. That is fraudulent IMO.

[deadlyCane]

I'll preface this by saying I don't have concrete evidence about what I'm go say. But I believe EA is most focused on meeting a deadline than making a game devoid of flaws. In an ideal world, the best business model for EA would be to make a near "perfect" game that everyone rave about. It would sell like hot cakes as word spreads about how this game is so great. I actually hate writing this but I highly doubt we'll ever see that.

Sports game generally don't lend themselves to best business models, especiall sports games with traction and history like NCAA and Madden. It's not like the developers are marketing a new untested game. These are games with an already established fan base of buyers and people who are fans of the particular sport. The author of the article is exactly the type of person EA needs and loves. It's someone who can't do without their fix of this year's version of their favorite sport, no matter how messed up it had been in the past. So the best business model for these types of games is to meet the deadline and then patch what you know is broken later. People are going to buy the damn game anyway, at least through anticipation or in hopes "they fixed what was broken last year." I don't know the author but I would bet good money he is going to buy this game next year. And if he comes away disappointed by his purchase, he is going to reward the culprits by buying their other product, Madden. It's an endless cycle that is a win win for EA. People just can't do without their virtual crack.

I don't think for a minute that EA QA/test these games with the intention to fix everything that is broken. Of course they fix some glaring issues prior to release. However, I would bet money that in the end time and budgetary constraints trumps devotion to create the best product possible. A big purpose of the QA process is to figure out what will be patched after release not what will be fixed before release. Basically, "find out the minimum amount of work we need to do for the game to be deemed at least acceptable."

If you accept the reality of the development cycle, a patch is much better than no patch. Why would you want a game where there is no hope its flaws will be fixed? I say be careful about writing that you don't like patches and how they are evil. It could be interpreted the wrong way. I actually don't like the article because it just says to EA that no matter what you guys do, you guys should just keep doing what you're doing. But of course, it's only a confirmation as I'm sure EA already knows that.

[fjccommish]

Patching is a great thing. But some basic errors shouldn't slip through into the release. "It will be fixed next year" is a very poor answer when it comes to issues with basic features.

[BoomerSooner11]

That was a good read.

[yankeesgiants]

At the end of the day, the responsibility is ON the consumer to do his or her homework before buying making a purchase plain and simple. ncaa 09 had a serious roster glitch that was known to the public BEFORE the game was released and yet one still waits in line at midnight to buy it. huh?? Wouldn't that make you wonder if something else is wrong before one plops down 60 bucks?? After all, what have these companies done to make you believe that the game will work properly out of the box? For the most part, the patches this year have been released a month after the game comes out. Why not just wait for the patches to be released and buy it used and if it still sucks to you, you can bring it back and get something else or buy it on ebay for 20 less dollars.

[bayouboy747]

I'll start off by saying I'm a diehard NCAA fan. I personally have no problem with NCAA pre or post patch. A game is just like any other form of entertainment, it's what YOU decide. I'm currently in the sixth season of an online dynasty with three of my buddies who live scattered across the U.S. Without NCAA's online dynasty mode my friends and I would have no way of playing a mulit-season football game.

[D_Money]

Considering that games go to press 45-60-75 days before release, I expect an on Day 1. That at least gives me the idea that the company recognizes some issues as opposed to you and I discovering them.

So my hope is that there are at least 2-3 patch cycles. That would give me a feeling that the game is evolving as opposed to a one-shot 'this-i-it' deal.

I wonder how much of effort and cost it is for post- release maintenance? To me, that maintenance investment would build and hopefully maintain loyalty and more satisfied users.