Support NeoGAF

[nynt9]

Is there really any other excuse for why some bugs still exist in games like Skyrim?

Ones like a quest item stuck in a wall, or retrieving a quest item before accepting the quest that disallows you to turn in the quest item. These things are known and easy to replicate, but they refused to fix them, whereas they were some of the first things fixed in community patches for the PC.

It obviously doesn't mean all devs are lazy or that it's the answer to everything, but they do exist.

To play devil's advocate here, maybe the engine they used is fundamentally broken and they realized it after the fact, and there's no way of fixing it unless they use a completely different engine, which is an impossible patch on consoles and would take a lot of money on PC.

PC community patches do fix stuff like that but they severely effect the long term stability of the game and cause random crashes, so it's not necessarily a viable fix.

 

[sparkeysam]

I like to think that they mostly do the best they can with the budget and timeframe they are given. I don't think most devs have a say in those business decisions.

 

[MidBoss]

No. I find this offensive. Devs do not work 60-80+ hours a week (sometimes with no overtime pay) to be called lazy. Blame aggressive deadlines. If you've made a game before then you'll know it's never truly finished. The game will likely evolve as you're making it, and any shipped game can be potentially updated. It's just a matter of how much time (and money) you/your boss/your publisher wants to put into it.

 

[McDougles]

Why not "lazy pubs?"

 

[Waaghals]

Giving how grueling game development is rumored to be "lazy devs" is the last accusation I would make.

I tend to put the blame higher up in the food chain.

 

[hodayathink]

I think the term "lazy devs" is a real thing but not in this context. IMO, it's real if we're talking about a dev that ships a broken product. For instance, I might call DICE "lazy devs" for the state BF4 was in when it launched but I wouldn't call DICE lazy devs simply because of the resolution disparity between the X1 and PS4 versions.

Even something like that isn't an issue with them being "lazy", it's them developing 5 different versions of the game at the same time (two of which wouldn't have had their specs nailed down until about 8-10 months before release) and not being given enough QA time to test and/or fix all the bugs.

The vast, vast, vast majority of the time, things that people blame on lazy devs is just the publisher not giving the developer enough time/money/resources to do what needs to be done.

 

[Data West]

Why not "lazy pubs?"

I'm pretty sure you don't have to worry about publishers getting the blame. They get it for everything related to games nowadays.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

"Lazy developers" is so ubiquitious because the internet, GAF included, is generally full of teenagers and people with similar mentalities that assume the only answer to them not being catered to is a lack of effort.

Now, don't get me wrong. Developers will sometimes cut corners, they will sometimes ignore things that shouldn't be ignored, but it's not usually because they're lazy. It's probably because they ran out of time and wanted to fix it and couldn't. There's also arrogant developer decisions like "I don't want anyone to be able to skip this cutscene even if it might make the game more enjoyable."

Developers can be arrogant or prideful or rushed or incompetent, but it's rare that you see something in a game that is simply a matter of them going "I could totally fix this but I'd rather take a nap."

 

[Snuggles]

It's a terrible argument that comes from a place of childish ignorance.

 

[wenis]

never. no one wants to put a bad game out into the world. no one that gets into this business wanting to make games for a living wants to put a bad game out into the world. there are a million and one reasons why something doesn't turn out the way it was intended and being a "lazy dev" is not one of them.

 

[Biker19]

They shouldn't blame 3rd party developers for Xbox One versions of games being weaker than the PS4 versions...they should be blaming Microsoft for putting in weaker hardware & for making the platform tough to develop games for.

 

[icespide]

its more like "bit off more than they can chew" then "lazy"

 

[SeventhSon]

Lazy devs is a lazy argument because these people cannot fathom how technical, complicated and difficult programming can be. It would be like explaining partial differential equations to someone who just completed 2nd grade math. You are unable to be a part of the conversation.

When you're being asked to pay money for a product, you're part of the conversation.

 

[TRios Zen]

I've always thought that the "lazy devs" argument was incredibly dull.

However I think your thread might be about 7 years too late.

 

[zma1013]

To play devil's advocate here, maybe the engine they used is fundamentally broken and they realized it after the fact, and there's no way of fixing it unless they use a completely different engine, which is an impossible patch on consoles and would take a lot of money on PC.

PC community patches do fix stuff like that but they severely effect the long term stability of the game and cause random crashes, so it's not necessarily a viable fix.

In a game as bug ridden as Bethesda games, who's going to be able to notice random crashes from the random crashes?

 

[-COOLIO-]

it's an incredibly stupid phrase that's caught on. the gaming industry is notorious for overworking their devs.

 

[chickdigger802]

lazy devs is just insulting in all context.

shitty publishers/managers/pms/executives sure, but game devs are about the hardest working folks in programming field today.

 

[LCGeek]

This time around though Xbox One and PS4 are VERY similar in their architecture, but with the difference being that PS4 has ~50% more raw power. Something that you can't keep up with no matter how hard you work. Dev's might of course find new ways to improve both performance and quality of games on Xbox One, but they will sure as hell not halt the development improvements on PS4. If the gap was rather small in terms of raw power it would be valid to say such things, but since the gap is quite big it's obvious that Xbox One simply can't keep up. It can't deliver the same performance and graphical quality like PS4 assuming the PS4 is being put to the test. If it's a less advanced game with older graphical features etc. you could say that it was an act of lazy devs if they were to perform and look very different.

No one is asking for parity. Most who know how to make the argument especially in the case of X1 are going to expect the dev to evaluate the system and make certain right choices. Like for me shitty unstable below 30fps is not an excuse anymore especially if the game is not a pusher. PS4 is not a factor at all at times and your situation is about multiplatforms what about xbla titles or exclusives that will perform like crap on X1?

 

[nynt9]

I've always thought that the "lazy devs" argument was incredibly dull.

However I think your thread might be about 7 years too late.

Just saw the argument used today, so the message still isn't reaching some, apparently.

 

[peronmls]

I hate it when people say crap like this. I know one person. (You know who you are)

 

[TC McQueen]

Maybe not specifically for XBO ports.. but what other explanation can you give PC ports that are fixed within hours by random people on the internet?

There are only a couple possible explanations.
1) Lazy Devs?
2) Ignorant Devs?
3) Spiteful Devs?

Lazy is the least bad of the three

If they're Japanese, add "4) Inexperienced Devs" to the list.

 

[FriedConsole]

All things are possible if devs work hard enough. Every game could be 60FPS and 1080p if devs just work hard enough.

This formula is science:

(processing power) X (devs work hardness) = (awesome gamez)

 

[Jomjom]

I think game devs without passion is legit, not lazy. Just like any other job that employs human beings there are people who just aren't passionate about what they are doing or creating and the end result will show.

The Xbone example though is just cause the hardware is weak.

 

[Guess Who]

'Lazy Devs' is my most hated comment. It shows a spectacular level of ignorance toward the development process, and how hellishly difficult it is.

Yup. Genuinely pisses me off every time I see it.

 

[lewisgone]

I don't know how game development works, but wouldn't "poor management" be a better criticism? For stuff like easily fixable PC ports, developers obviously have been putting work. So surely the explanation is that the people telling the developers what the work on are ignoring certain things like resolution etc., so it's just bad priorities.

Again though, idk how game development works.

 

[Vinterbird]

When you're being asked to pay money for a product, you're part of the conversation.

So you get to judge the development situation without knowing it?

You can't call the developers lazy without any evidence. And if that evidence consists exclusively of you determining that there are too many bugs or the game is too short then it's simply not valid.

 

[atr0cious]

It depends on your definition of 'lazy.' The Ubisoft Shanghai devs removed local coop from the Wii U version, the co-op machine, that was present on last gen consoles, while continuing to advertise it on the eShop.

 

[StevieP]

It depends on your definition of 'lazy.' The Ubisoft Shanghai devs removed local coop from the Wii U version, the co-op machine, that was present on last gen consoles.

That wasn't the result of Lazyness, it was the result of the time/money/etc allocated to that port.

 

[Broder Salsa]

It depends on your definition of 'lazy.' The Ubisoft Shanghai devs removed local coop from the Wii U version, the co-op machine, that was present on last gen consoles.

Do you think that was them being lazy, or under budgeted and understaffed for the port though?

 

[CadetMahoney]

Was PS3 Skyrim "lazy devs" or not?

 

[-COOLIO-]

It depends on your definition of 'lazy.' The Ubisoft Shanghai devs removed local coop from the Wii U version, the co-op machine, that was present on last gen consoles.

so are you saying that you think the devs were lazy in this case?

 

[ShinMaruku]

Some devs and publishers are lazy (See the MMO industry those un imaginative delusional folk) but it's mainly put forward in that people want the best out of a developers when a developer takes a path with least resistance, not for laziness for some times but for time or misunderstanding or shit code.

I think the real issue is there needs to be some standards in development some things should be standardize to help cut down on work on some trivial things that when added up will help make development smoother and more efficient so some of the quibbles will have more time to be worked on.

 

[Snuggles]

Was PS3 Skyrim "lazy devs" or not?

I wasn't laziness so much as a publisher refusing to potentially lose sales by delaying an unfinished project. It's not like Bethesda were sitting around hitting bongs and eating cheetos and just said "fuck it".

 

[atr0cious]

Do you think that was them being lazy, or under budgeted and understaffed for the port though?

Well the community manager went to the MIiVerse, asked what needed to be fixed, then proceeded to lie for 5 months that they would fix it, while implementing patches handed down from the PC version. So yea, what is that called?

 

[Broder Salsa]

3drealms now that is one lazy ass fucking dev.

Well the community manager went to the MIiVerse, asked what needed to be fixed, then proceeded to lie for 5 months that they would fix it, while implementing patches handed down from the PC version. So yea, what is that called?

Being a dickhead? I don't know, I didn't really follow the game, but from your post it sounds like he's a bit of a dick and there's some decisions out of his hands, that he desperately tries to cover up for.

 

[Cat Party]

It was a stupid argument last gen and its a stupid one now.

Yup.

 

[Kimawolf]

Why can't a developer be lazy? Would you prefer "just bad at their jobs?"

Can a director be lazy? or any other profession? that's what's wrong with gamers now, the excuses made for broken games, shoddy ports and super late ports. Yes they can be lazy like any other job. They need to be called out more. Gaming is the only job you can get where you can complain about your customers and they will agree and still buy your crap, or you can put out half finished, buggy, poor performing garbage and have entire forums defending your work for every reason but because you're "lazy" or just bad at your job.

 

[Octavia]

No. I find this offensive. Devs do not work 60-80+ hours a week (sometimes with no overtime pay) to be called lazy. Blame aggressive deadlines. If you've made a game before then you'll know it's never truly finished. The game will likely evolve as you're making it, and any shipped game can be potentially updated. It's just a matter of how much time (and money) you/your boss/your publisher wants to put into it.

Pretty much this. Deadlines and pushing to get the thing out the door is generally the biggest problem most game productions face.

However, there are exceptions for additions/subtractions of things that wouldn't have taken much effort, but doesn't make it to production. It's not generally a case of laziness though, more just bad design decisions from inexperience and multiple input sources.

An example of this would be in BL2. They spent time and money to produce DLC, and patch out a bunch of things that made the game more fun (like leveling up off of Fleshstick), but they couldn't be asses to fix the final boss commonly having rare items glitch under its dead husk (they did eventually patch this over a year later well after the exploits were dealt with), or that some of the loot it spews out has way too high of a an upper limit velocity value on it and at least a few things including rare items end up in the unreachable lava because of it. Literally, 1 variable to change, and they couldn't be bothered.

 

[StevieP]

Well the community manager went to the MIiVerse, asked what needed to be fixed, then proceeded to lie for 5 months that they would fix it, while implementing patches handed down from the PC version. So yea, what is that called?

A publisher doing what publishers do to mitigate a shitty situation. Again, evidence suggests that port received very little budget/staff/etc

 

[-COOLIO-]

Was ______ "lazy devs" or not?

the only gaming example i could think of to fill in that blank is 'the rush of flappy bird clones'. i doubt 'lazy devs' are anywhere near AAA videogame production because a) videogame development pays comparatively poorly and work hours are long so youll only be interested if youre passionate, and b) they would get sacked so that someone new could get hired and burnt out.

 

[LCGeek]

So you get to judge the development situation without knowing it?

You can't call the developers lazy without any evidence. And if that evidence consists exclusively of you determining that there are too many bugs or the game is too short then it's simply not valid.

Even when there is evidence people still defend shitty decisions be it devs or publishers. To me devs seem like cowards when I hear some of these arguments. I see them as cowards cause ultimately crap decisions made by management will cost them jobs they had no real fault in causing the situation yet they won't stick up for themselves. I'd use other phrases but those are probably even more insulting but that's the point.

Also considering how the industry works and likes to keep things hush hush we can't really judge based on your standards. If we find any info out it's because of leaks or because certain people were given permission to speak out in some. Don't forget about ndas and tons of other things that keep people from speaking.

 

[hodayathink]

Was PS3 Skyrim "lazy devs" or not?

Shitty engine not suited to the PS3's architecture, not lazy devs. Still doesn't excuse them from releasing it like that, though.

 

[JABEE]

If you don't understand the constraints and reality of game development and production and still speculate like you do, it only makes you look silly.

The question is should we blame this ignorance on those who are spewing it or does part of the blame lie with publishers who go out of their way to make game development and its hardships and intricacies a hidden secret?

I think you wouldn't hear people making these dumb statements if developers and bosses in charge of these titles some real transparency on how these products are made. I have a hard time blaming forum posters for not understanding something that is being purposefully withheld from the press.

I understand Indies have tried to make things more transparent, but developer communications with the actual customers is almost always polished nonsense that doesn't really go into any not so peachy areas of game production.

If publishers want consumers to understand arguments about how "you don't understand how much shit goes into making a game," maybe they should actually make a real attempt at building that kind of consumer knowledge.

I understand that it must suck as an individual developer reading anonymous people calling you and your team lazy, but people are human. They are emotional. They can only work with the information they have to draw these kinds of conclusions. I think people would appreciate these jobs more if there was actual consumer facing communication that presented that kind of information.

It's the kind of thing that a good union may actually negotiate for. The same with credits and other things. I think "lazy devs" is more than just a throwaway statement. It just demonstrates how limiting consumer knowledge is impacting the lives of developers.

It may make economic sense not to talk about how you are overworked in any official capacity, but that kind of transparency would make people appreciate games more. People may even begin to demand that games not be developed in a soul destroying way if they actually knew that was how games were produced. It may even drive publishers to prioritize the happiness and health of their employees more, because it's actually a crucial aspect of the games marketing.

 

[hodayathink]

Well the community manager went to the MIiVerse, asked what needed to be fixed, then proceeded to lie for 5 months that they would fix it, while implementing patches handed down from the PC version. So yea, what is that called?

A dishonest dev, not a lazy one.

 

[AlphaTwo00]

Is there really any other excuse for why some bugs still exist in games like Skyrim?

Ones like a quest item stuck in a wall, or retrieving a quest item before accepting the quest that disallows you to turn in the quest item. These things are known and easy to replicate, but they refused to fix them, whereas they were some of the first things fixed in community patches for the PC.

It obviously doesn't mean all devs are lazy or that it's the answer to everything, but they do exist.

Nope. You've totally missed why those bugs exist. I can assure that the team and the QA staff have logged it, it was debated, evaluated, and was eventually told that they weren't allowed to fix it because of time/budget/resource. I would even be willing to bet that the fix was ready and just wasn't greenlighted for testing/publishing.

 

[Dark Octave]

Lazy devs is generally shorthand for "the publisher did not put the time/money/both into this project necessary for it to reach to a satisfactory conclusion"

Exactly. Should be changed to, "cheap pubs". I'm not sure there are too many developers that don't want to do the best job they can and show off how amazing they are for their personal portfolio and their house.

 

[TAJ]

It's usually, but not always, the rallying cry of people who think that weaker consoles are their gfs. Nintendo fanboys in particular have abused the shit out of this phrase for generations, for obvious reasons.

 

[atr0cious]

3drealms now that is one lazy ass fucking dev.



Being a dickhead? I don't know, I didn't really follow the game, but from your post it sounds like he's a bit of a dick and there's some decisions out of his hands, that he desperately tries to cover up for.

I consider lazy taking out the advertised features of a game, while also shipping out a broken product. If the online actually worked, I'd swallow my lumps. Not only does it not work, it actively harms my system to play it. I'd rather they have Watch_Dogs'd it, if they were going to do that. I think my multiple calls to Ubisoft are part of the reason Watch_Dogs is on hold now. I hope it's for the better, for all their future customers' sakes.

 

[SeventhSon]

So you get to judge the development situation without knowing it?

You can't call the developers lazy without any evidence. And if that evidence consists exclusively of you determining that there are too many bugs or the game is too short then it's simply not valid.

The circumstances that lead to an inferior product are irrelevant to me when you are trying to convince me to give you money for that inferior product. I'm speaking here of technical issues, not the more subjective things like "amount of content."

 

[Woffls]

From my experience, developers have to deliver a product. They have to prove to stakeholders that they are meeting regular goals so that targets can be met, which often means focussing on new functionality and shoving defects into the backlog. Before you know it, the final build is due in two weeks, and those low severity defects don't get a second thought.

Bugs don't exist because developers aren't capable or motivated. Unfortunately it's just one of those things that's really fucking complicated, and it's very difficult to understand it from the outside.