They are the boss/project manager in the scenario. Devs are working for the publisher. The publisher decides how to allocate dev resources and ultimately determine workflow.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Arkham Origins "no plans on releasing another patch" DLC to take priority
- Thread starter GekigangerV
- Start date
They are the boss/project manager in the scenario. Devs are working for the publisher. The publisher decides how to allocate dev resources and ultimately determine workflow.
Palette Swap
Member
Isn't the budget for patches on the publisher's side?
Exactly, even more so in this instance since the publisher owns the developer. You may find that if it was a Rocksteady game, they might have more leverage if they wanted to get a patch out and WB wanted them to just work on the DLC as they've knocked 2 well recieved games out, so it may "dilute the brand" of Rocksteady. But these guys probably have nothing even if they did ask for resources for more patches.
Omegasquash
Member
Heh. So, I had a vasectomy Friday before last, and as part of my recovery I sat my ass in the basement with an ice pack on my balls and medication in my system. I also figured I should play through Arkham Asylum and Arkham City, which I did. Loved 'em so much that I was ready to pick up Origins this week!
Now this thread is here, and I'm all "well, shit." At least Batman made the downtime bearable.
Now this thread is here, and I'm all "well, shit." At least Batman made the downtime bearable.
Basically the tittle shouldn't be released if it is broken in any way. Everyone really should be observing a policy to never buy on launch in order to really force the issue home and waiting for announcements of this nature to indicate which way the wind is blowing.
Typically, folks pay people to beta test their products for them, not the other way around.
SolidSnakeUS
Member
More than likely WB doesn't give a shit and wants to milk Origins as much as possible before it gets any worse.
Storm Chamber
Banned
As long as people keep buying their bullshit, can you really blame them?
It's gotten to the point where they can literally say "fuck a patch, give us more money"
Yep.
But the only difference will be people will pretend it doesn't exist or throw themselves in front of a train for the rockksteady game in order to defend it, just like with the previous two rocksteady games
Pretty sure Warner owns a controlling majority of rocksteady.
No game is bug free.
CadetMahoney
Member
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
I wish we could get some actual stats on how many users had their problems taken care of by the five patches they released, and how many still have problems remaining.
It's kind of a weird bummer to be a player on this board who enjoyed the game, having a good relatively bug-free experience. I'm not really sure how comparable this is to Battlefield 4 in number of issues.
It's kind of a weird bummer to be a player on this board who enjoyed the game, having a good relatively bug-free experience. I'm not really sure how comparable this is to Battlefield 4 in number of issues.
Don't think that's what he meant - just that Rocksteady has a sufficiently prestigious reputation that they might be given more leverage than WB Montreal was.
You'd be wrong. If warner wanted them to prioritize dlc over patches, they will...and have. Just like both the previous arkham games.
They only way they might have more leeway is that they'll probably have a bigger budget vs warner mont, but if push game to shove they're in the same spot warner mont is.
Spring-Loaded
Member
I'll preface this by saying choosing to not support publishers and developers for making such decisions is fine.
However, the same thing happened with Rocksteady and you never saw a reaction on the same level as this. No one was saying that Rocksteady should no longer work on the series. A similar situation with Bethesda published games; the bigger, more well-loved the developer, the more they are forgiven for mistakes.
WB Games Montreal happened to leave a couple game-breaking glitches in Origins (that only some players experienced). If those glitches were fixed, many would consider that acceptable and wouldn't boycott the developer/series. If that decision is being made by WB (the publisher), then those people should focus their attack on WB themselves and not use the decision as justification for saying "small, inexperienced devs shouldn't be able to step in on big series."
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
Gearbox had the bugs with Borderlands 2 AND farmed out Aliens: Colonial Marines through another dev at the time that is now bankrupt. This after coming off of Duke Nuke'em. I don't think its going to keep people from buying the next Borderlands.
Rodney McKay
Member
Here's a few picks I took a few weeks ago when the PC version bugged out on me (no these were not Scarecrow/psychedelic levels:
This was right at the
. Half of the world didn't load and I fell off the edge of the world when the game decided to save. :|
This was right at the
evidence room in the Police Station
spacemonkeynation
Member
That's a pretty shitty reply. I'm one of the lucky ones I guess that was able to complete this fantastic entry. It's more of the same but with the best plot of the entire trilogy. It's sad that so many people won't play it just because it's not innovative.
For some reason Halo, God of War, and CoD get by with 5+ main entries without much real innovation but if Batman isn't brand spanking new this time it's the end of the world. Also, I think it's kinda funny how many just chalk this up to another negative for this dev studio when the orders come from up high (WB). It's quite possible the developer made this public statement to collect community outcry as leverage.
For some reason Halo, God of War, and CoD get by with 5+ main entries without much real innovation but if Batman isn't brand spanking new this time it's the end of the world. Also, I think it's kinda funny how many just chalk this up to another negative for this dev studio when the orders come from up high (WB). It's quite possible the developer made this public statement to collect community outcry as leverage.
atomic moth
Member
You forgot to mention that the game doesn't work for people and it won't be fixed. You know, the entire point of this thread.
Rodney McKay
Member
Yeah, I learned to stop preordering a long time ago (when I did it for Red Faction Armageddon because I loved Guerrilla, ugh).
The problem was that I had heard the game HAD been patched so I thought it was safe to buy during the holiday Steam sale... but clearly I should have been reading forum impressions and not news articles talking about the patch.
spacemonkeynation
Member
I wasn't aware of any huge, widespread game breaking bugs. What are they and on what platforms?
spacemonkeynation
Member
It was patched. I was able to play through the entire game on PC and the major side missions. I didn't do everything as I'm not a completionist, but all the story driven side quests I tackled just fine. The only big I ran into was the radio tower glitch and that was patched.
atomic moth
Member
Read the thread or use google would be my suggestion
Zen_Arcade
Banned
In the time it took to be needlessly snarky you could have answered his question.
shadowfall
Member
Purchase prevented. I might as well wait for it to be free on PS PLUS.
spacemonkeynation
Member
Yeah really. I'm just trying to gauge how bad this issue really is. Hyperbole is fairly common practice here and this game has long been wrongly maligned (IMO) in the past.
Like I said I would bet this is an attempt by a developer to create enough sensationalism to get publisher support to fix their game. Do you guys really think the devs don't want their hard work to be played by as many people as possible?
Rodney McKay
Member
See the screenshots I just posted above? Those were post patch. In addition to that there are also minor glitches that stop some of the challenges from unlocking properly which is irritating as someone who IS a completionist. Due to these bugs I uninstalled the game the second I beat it. It's too similar to the other games that if I need my Batman fix, I'll play the combat and stealth maps in those two games again. It's not worth having to backup my own saves in case I hit a game breaking bug again.
Good for you that they fixed some of the bugs, but they didn't catch all of them and the fact they wont continue to work on fixes is really shitty.
spacemonkeynation
Member
It is shitty. So are you locked out of the game now, unable to progress? Have you attempted to get your money back?
spacemonkeynation
Member
Ok so you were able to complete the game. That still sucks but it doesn't sound game breaking at least.
A ridiculous stance to take.
Rodney McKay
Member
No, it WAS. I had to completely restart the game when I was already 6-8 hours into it.
Then to be safe I manually made backups of my saves every hour or so if the game did glitch out on me again I could restore an older save.
I honestly shouldn't have since I didn't even enjoy the game as much as the other two. Combat just felt slightly off compared to the other games (until you the shock gloves, those are fun), and the story started good but really soured for me near the end.
Not really. As long as Rocksteady continues to make Arkham games he can still play those. He just doesn't want to support a developer that wont fix issues with their games that they know to be broken. Nothing wrong with that at all.
lmao I love people like you.
"I've never heard or experienced said bugs, so they don't exist!"
Despite the developer themselves acknowledging that problems exist, people like you will still try to claim it isn't an issue. It really is amazing
Then I'll happily support it, because I will buy games if they are good games. And I know Rocksteady's next Batman game will be good.
spacemonkeynation
Member
Yes that's exactly what I've said. Jesus, I was literally asking for actual accounts of the current state of game breaking bugs. And yet somehow it's viewed as denial? Sorry if I don't feel like going into hardcore research mode and for thinking that a thread could be used for information rather than the cesspool of vile discourse this is turning into.
I never said it wasn't an issue. In fact I said I was disappointed so many people might not get to experience one of the finer Arkham games.
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
We all know the industry includes a reality of known, shippable bugs. So the question becomes not, does a game have bugs, but how many, how bad are they, and how many users are affected.
Since none of us have this data, we all just pretty much use the overall level of internet outrage as our gauges for these measures. Not accurate, probably, but all we have.
Since none of us have this data, we all just pretty much use the overall level of internet outrage as our gauges for these measures. Not accurate, probably, but all we have.
I'm sooo glad you've been posting this stuff.
I made a reply on the first page but it was ignored because people went on to praise Rocksteady... Rocksteady made games with bugs that were just as criminal, so they don't get a pass by me. I was nearly at the end of Arkham 1 when a stupid ass autosaving bug fucked my progress for good. When I looked it up, it was happening to a lot of people on their forums... on all platforms, in various spots within the game. They continued to make DLC and WB continued to make DLC-GOTY editions of the same game with not patches or updates to their broken foundation. So yeah, Rocksteady is not exempt from this discussion- but WB is ultimately to blame. This Origins shit reinforces that. They don't give a rat's ass about the consumer, and that hasn't changed in years.
As has already been said many times, this is almost certainly WBIE's call, not that of the dev team itself.
atomic moth
Member
Is it really my job to make sure people read the thread they're posting in?
Zen_Arcade
Banned
No, but you also don't have to be rude towards them either. There's a middle ground, find it and grow up.
Orniletter
Banned
It is so easy to wait for third party games and don´t buy them brand new.
They will:
-be cheaper
-patched to the point they should have launched at
- often include the inevitable DLC (GOTY editions)
...now we have reached the point where publishers don´t even feel responsible for their malfunctioning software.
Bah.
They will:
-be cheaper
-patched to the point they should have launched at
- often include the inevitable DLC (GOTY editions)
...now we have reached the point where publishers don´t even feel responsible for their malfunctioning software.
Bah.
And? I, and everyone else with a high school diploma, get the base tribal reasons of why videobgame fanboys act delusional towards stuff they like. Or are you trying to make excuses for them or something? That's kinda of really pathetic if so...
That's the thing: it IS warner's fault. Publishers decide release dates, and thus publishers decide to ship a game that's obviously not ready. Publishers, especially ones that own the studio, dictate what the development team is working on, and thus the publisher chose to focus the team on something that earns the company more money (dlc) vs something that doesn't (patches).
I meam fuck there's really no way you can pin this on the devs here. Just look at the games credits ffs. There must have been 3 studios and over 100 people listed in the qa section of the credits. You think those people don't know how to do their job or something? Fuck no. To get to be in those positions on a tripple a game in the extremely competitive montreal development community you /have/ to be good at your job. So the implication that these bugs even could have been missed just totally blows my fucking mind. The qa teams knew. Warner mont knew. And warner knew. The latter didnt care, and the former two probably ended up working multiple 100+ hour work week to get the game even in the shape it was in in the first place. And what does all that hard work get them? Lower review scores that their bonuses are effected by because of bugs that were left that they had no way to fix due to an impossible to meet deadline and Morons like the one's in this thread calling them lazy and/or incompetent.
And that's why people usually don't end sticking around in game development. They work impossible hours for mediocre pay and the end result of all that time and effort? Coming home after a 14 hour shift and reading online that you're lazy and/or incompetent AT BEST, and at worst people telling you to go kill yourself and your family because of something 99% of the time you had no control over.
But yeah.
itzknickknac
Member
Wow, I stopped to play other games.. wanted to get back into Origins. Guess not anymore for a while
Alright, apparently we're just throwing insults around.
WB publisher knew the game wasn't ready. Why wasn't it ready? Because WB Montreal didn't get it done. Plenty of other developers manage to make games in two years (with an engine already provided) which aren't nearly as broken as Arkham Origins was. Case in point: Arkham City. It wasn't perfect but it wasn't fundamentally broken like Origins. Montreal also has released multiple patches that still haven't addressed many of the issues.
Montreal are at fault for the bugs. They didn't do their job properly. They didn't deliver a working game by the deadline. WB may have gone ahead and released said game in the interest of money, but Montreal are not blameless.
If I give you a deadline (Montreal knew the game's release date at least six months in advance) and you deliver a broken product that's your fault. If I choose to release that product instead of delay it, yes, that's my fault and I'm screwing the consumers, but I didn't break the product. If WB Montreal were better developers, they would have met their deadline with a game in better condition. It's that simple. They do deserve some blame.
Who do you think owns Rocksteady.
On a side note.. Didn't encounter any game breaking bugs. PC copy.