Why are some games so buggy?

Tom Clancy's The Division designer says "it depends on how big your game is and what your aspirations are."

257 Comments
No Caption Provided

Technical issues--better known to gamers as "bugs"--are nothing new. Sometimes they are funny but other times they cause extreme frustration and can even lead to lawsuits. But why aren't they weeded out in the development process? The Division developer Massive Entertainment lead gameplay programmer Anders Holmquist has offered up an answer to that question, saying it all comes down to what your specific expectations are for the project.

"It depends on how big your game is and what your aspirations are. Different companies and different projects set very different goals for how many bugs they think is OK to have when they release," Holmquist said during a recent Google Hangout.

A lot of the time, the number of bugs in a finished game depends on "boring things" like time constraints (every project has a deadline, after all) and money, Holmquist said. He explained that for most projects, developers might spend the final two or three months specifically working on eliminating bugs and not adding new features, but the real answer to why some games ship with so many bugs is more complex.

This is because developers like Massive Entertainment are constantly fixing bugs throughout the development process, Holmquist said. "We're basically fixing bugs and issues all the time," he said. Bugs like total system crashes must be fixed right away, Holmquist said, while others can be left to linger--at least for a short while.

"The more you let a bug or an issue linger, the more problems you're going to have to fix it," Holmquist said. "The faster you are from the point where you find a problem to when you fix it, the easier your life is going to be."

The Division launches sometime later this year for Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and PC. For more, check out GameSpot's previous coverage.

Please use a html5 video capable browser to watch videos.
This video has an invalid file format.
00:00:00
Sorry, but you can't access this content!
Please enter your date of birth to view this video

By clicking 'enter', you agree to GameSpot's
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

$39.99 on Amazon
Buy
$5.99 on Walmart
Buy

GameSpot may get a commission from retail offers.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 257 comments about this story
257 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for usamah_10
Usamah_10

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

does any 1 think this game is very close to GRFS - Ghost Recon Future Soldier game ?

I just love UBISOFT

Upvote • 
Avatar image for charlesswann
CharlesSwann

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

The Division won't really look like that. As for bugs, broken games tend to have them.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for scraper2k
scraper2k

53

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Who cares about bugs... damn The Division looks sweeeeeet!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for kill130
kill130

26

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

OMG... this was the last game that Tom attended before he passed away...
We gonna miss you Tom Clancy'..

Upvote • 
Avatar image for tightwad34
tightwad34

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

WTF kind of an article is this? More fine journalism from Gamespot. BTW, the answer to the title is quite an easy one.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for mxgod
mxgod

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

It's good to have an occasional bug like in the UFC 2009 game. OMFG it was fa-larious when the characters randomly bent in directions that are not possible :D It cracks me up.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ncogneegro
Ncogneegro

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

This is a shitty article designed for flame bait.


The real question is why are assholes like Warner Bros, telling us they won't fix their broken ass games, but instead want to sell us more DLC and you clowns are not writing about that load horse shit?


Discuss.

2 • 
Avatar image for daikkenaurora12
daikkenaurora12

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Because they arent finished.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for kovaras1984
kovaras1984

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

Because people use EA to publish their games

4 • 
Avatar image for dalepickstock
dalepickstock

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Games are getting bigger and take/cost more to develop. There's a trade off between how much money and profit you expect to make out of a game compared to it costs you to create. With expectations that games need to be bigger, better and cheaper its not hard to see why we are getting more bugs these days. Shame though.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for croxus
Croxus

299

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 53

User Lists: 5

Lets ask EA after launching the bugfest called Battlefield 4...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for randybumgardner
RandyBumGardner

257

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

big games like final fantasy x or metal gear solid 4 have literally zero flaws.


american games seem to me more buggy.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for kovaras1984
kovaras1984

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

<< LINK REMOVED >> Whaaaat lol, yeah lol zero bugs in both those games! a simple Google will just confirm this bold statement in no time at all.... oh god damm look at all those bugs :P

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Warlord_Irochi
Warlord_Irochi

3869

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 7

"it depends on how big your game is and what your aspirations are."

Plus priorities plus Deadlines, which are always a problem there. In a lot of cases the bugs you end experiencing in a game are those caused by last minute tweaks made by the coders in a build that (obviously, since they were last minute) did not went through QA.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for spikex8
spikex8

119

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> cake

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Bellum_Sacrum
Bellum_Sacrum

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Pushy publishers are why there are bugs. Which is why when games are developed in-house (Nintendo/SCE Japan) the games end up much higher in quality.

6 • 
Avatar image for arqe
arqe

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Less Publisher = Less Errors

4 • 
Avatar image for hardeddie
hardeddie

242

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

Where are you Bethesda?

4 • 
Avatar image for Fenixx
Fenixx

73

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

That is complete BS. Bugs, glitches, flaws, whatever...they all exist simply because things weren't done properly. Either a model wasn't built right, the code had something wrong, etc. It's all because of the people rushing to get things done or they screw up in the process and it gets overlooked. There's also no such thing as "how many bugs they think is OK to have when they release." Your goal should be to not have any!! This article is a perfect example of the modern day lazy developer.

8 • 
Avatar image for kovaras1984
kovaras1984

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

<< LINK REMOVED >> if only game spot had a dislike as well as like option, you have no clue what so ever about your commenting on lol

Upvote • 
Avatar image for justinka777
justinka777

147

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> I totally agree with you man, Nintendo is seems to be the only one that doesn't revolve around post launch updates to have a functioning game.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ncogneegro
Ncogneegro

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >>

You do know that the ratio between the number of games Nintendo puts to other companies is incredibly lopsided.

1. Nintendo has their own console.

2. All games by Nintendo and their 2nd parties are designed for their system ONLY.

3. They devote more resources to QA, licensing testing because they don't have as many games to test., if Nintendo has 2 games releasing a quarter, Ubi/EA/Activision will have 10 a piece releasing for multiple systems. The QA (quality assurance) is a time consuming, in depth process. Not only are you looking for bugs, but you are generally looking for breaks in the gameplay, storyline pathing issues (I did QA on Morrowind and Oblivion in Hunt Valley MD) not to mention graphical glitches. Each thing was different on each platform.


PC games are the worst and reason #2 why PC gaming almost died. EVERY PC is different, the combinations of hardware and software makes it impossible to effectively do software/hardware compatability.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Warlord_Irochi
Warlord_Irochi

3869

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 7

<< LINK REMOVED >>Your comment is a example of talking without having real knowledge of how things works. Nothing is white or black in the industry.


For example: "There's also no such thing as "how many bugs they think is OK to have when they release.""
There is, in fact: It's called "Painlevel system" and it's used by a lot of companies (Nintendo and Ubisoft, for example) and also checked by first party before a game is allowed a release in any of their systems.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for games100
games100

511

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> You really don't have a clue about software development, especially developing games.

16 • 
Avatar image for Zeeksie
Zeeksie

1575

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >>Oh, and you do?

Instead of questioning his knowledge of game development, perhaps you could provide a better explanation on why there are glitches in video games and what would be a better way to prevent such things from happening? Eh, smartguy? Please, by all means, enlighten us.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for games100
games100

511

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >>


I work as a tester for a digital agency; we have developed a number of games that are currently live and performing very well. In addition we are currently developing and testing a game that will be on a next-gen console near you soon, so as far as experience goes, I would say that I am pretty experienced.


Josevalerio is spot on, as games become more and more complex and the user expects more functionality, the opportunity for bugs and glitches grows massively.  It is simply impossible to expect a developer to try and cover every possible scenario that could take place within a game.  Developers are only human after all.


The testing time that is put into testing a title is already huge and extremely costly, trying to catch everything would be completely unfeasible.


You will never know if a game has no bugs when it’s released, this is exactly why we build in a system that allows games to be quickly an efficiently updated with minimal impact to the user.  If a bug is found we can continuously inspect and adapt our code, bugs get fixed and the code becomes better. 


Games are also independently tested by the publisher, any known bugs are prioritised and a decision is made as to whether the title can be published with some bugs as some times it makes financial sense.  The ‘Lazy developer’ does not make this decision.

9 • 
Avatar image for quakke
quakke

225

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 5

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >>

Ignorant. Really? In these times when 70% of AAA games are being released with bugs because of just rushing stuff out as quickly as possible. Arkham Origins devs even admitted that the game has game-breaking-bugs but they instead keep developing DLC (greed) for the game, than fixing the bugs. BF4 launched how it launched etc..


You sir should not have an voice on this matter, since you are the reason we are in this situation in the first place. People like you kept accepting EA's microtransactions and microbugs. You are the thing that has ruined stuff.


People, do like i do. You love gaming, or a specific genre? Then start developing your own game of that specific genre. In my case it's true old school FPS. This the only way stuffs gonna change. We have to show how we alone have more talent and creative visions than these big AAA studios even combined together.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Boogy32
Boogy32

49

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >> Well it's not like Fenixx is much better... His statement seems completely ignorant. Still you should try to offer an explanation when you are trying to enlighten the masses.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for josevalerio
JoseValerio

31

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >> i agree with games100... such a complex piece of code like a videogame can have bugs that only appear in some specific "corner-cases" (for example, if your character gets killed at the same moment the mission goal is achieved, or if you make your character go to some "forbidden place" in an open-world environment).


the developers cannot try to reproduce all the possible scenarios that could produce bugs, because, they are infinite in theory... so, that's why there are the alpha and beta phases, where the game (the software, in general), gets used by real people, so the most common bugs are detected. There will almost always be some bugs that are not caught by these phases and manage to be in the final product.


of course, the more extensive these test phases, the less bugs will go undetected, and there's when money and time play a role.

3 • 
Avatar image for spKeeper20
spKeeper20

41

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

I understand what they mean when saying big games have more bugs, but still I don't think this is acceptable. I remember when I played Fallout: New Vegas, there was one mission where if I did not take a very specific route through it or my game would crash. The fact that this was not caught during alpha or beta testing leads me to believe they did not spend enough time or resources on it. Either way, this should be avoided.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ForceSkin
ForceSkin

43

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> At least you got through that game. Twenty hours in and for some reason all the factions turned against me suddenly. It made it impossible to do any missions. I had to return it which sucked because I liked it

Upvote • 
Avatar image for kidnatural
kidnatural

649

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> Are you perfect? Or are you asking them to make a smaller games? Mistakes are made. I agree that the bug was unacceptable. But whether it's inexcusable is dependent upon the rest of what the game offers.


I understand they're frustrating. Trust me, if those folks caught it, they didn't want to see something that big in there whatsoever. But sometimes, even if those cases arise, you really can go bankrupt if you go on too long because of a mistake (often extremely small code incompatibilities).

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Warlord_Irochi
Warlord_Irochi

3869

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 7

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >>Well he is right in that case; an unavoidable crash/blocker in a mission that is in the player's path should not have made it to the release version of the game.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for KotomineKirei
KotomineKirei

422

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I thought the cause of bugs was errors in the code (e.g. the developer(programmer) didn't write the code correctly or forgot to add code to prevent the other code from working when or in a way that it's not supposed to)

Kind of like when you forget to carry over a number in math, or you don't use the right formula...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Warlord_Irochi
Warlord_Irochi

3869

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 7

<< LINK REMOVED >> Not always just errors. sometimes it's correct pieces of code causing a conflict with each other. Something not strange when you have written thousand of lines and you just can't keep track of where was that particular line that you wrote three days ago.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for kidnatural
kidnatural

649

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> To an extent. Very minute incompatibilities can cause a ruckus. These games get extremely complex. Expectedly, small mobile games tend to have less noticeable bugs. Less player liberty. Less complexity.

2 • 
Avatar image for Henninger
Henninger

1671

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: -4

I guess in WB Montreal's case it was just laziness.

2 • 
Avatar image for No_Intelligence
No_Intelligence

199

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

Publishers always want control on the games because they know best right? They make stupid decisions and make changes that they think makes the game better. Project managers micromanage, then programmers strip out code and redevelop features or add in features without sufficient time. The bottom line, publishers are not willing to put more money into developing their games.

Oh and project managers take up too much budget.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Spybreak
Spybreak

252

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

As someone who's worked in QA, I'm guessing this is how it went for every game. QA: Ohh, whoops, I found a bug. Lead: Does it cause the game to be unplayable? QA: Ah no the game's still technically up and running. Lead: OK, mark it and move on. ... Day of launch rolls around Lead: Have we squashed that bug yet? QA: Nope, can't figure out why it's coming up. Lead: OK well since it doesn't make the game unplayable we'll patch it in later. ... Later on new patch is "rolled out" squashing that bug, causing 5 more.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Warlord_Irochi
Warlord_Irochi

3869

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 7

<< LINK REMOVED >> Every single time! LOL

Upvote •