[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="RR360DD"]Damn those microsoft for wanting to make sure updates are up to standard before releasing to the public!RR360DDIt really says something about that when it takes months to get a patch through. Standards or not, that is not acceptable. Well it says in the article they are working to get updates out faster, so not sure what else people expect really It's idiotic that Microsoft thing a developer is going to patch a game and somehow break everyones Xbox or something. I can understand reviewing patches for the really small XLBA games because some of those are dodgy anyway, but it's not like Bethesda is suddenly going to hack everyones Xbox is it.
World of Tanks devs: Xbox policies unacceptable for F2P/indie developers
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="RR360DD"][QUOTE="clyde46"] It really says something about that when it takes months to get a patch through. Standards or not, that is not acceptable. bobbetybobWell it says in the article they are working to get updates out faster, so not sure what else people expect really It's idiotic that Microsoft thing a developer is going to patch a game and somehow break everyones Xbox or something. I can understand reviewing patches for the really small XLBA games because some of those are dodgy anyway, but it's not like Bethesda is suddenly going to hack everyones Xbox is it.Patches even from big developers can screw up consoles. Didn't The Last of Us have a patch recently that was bricking consoles? That is not only a big developer but a Sony 1st party.
hell, i'm still pissed that they were pressured to get rid of the patch fee they charged devs for releasing broken crap.Devs can't account for the PoS 360 hardware randomly giving errors, glitching out, overheating and breaking down when trying to run simple code that could be run on PC's from 2003. That's why devs need to patch the incessant save-game errors caused by the abysmal hard- and software Microsoft has provided them with. Why should devs be held accountable for problems caused by Microsoft's inability to code or make reliable hardware?i liked that devs that released a faulty game were punished for itRiverwolf007
Damn those microsoft for wanting to make sure updates are up to standard before releasing to the public!RR360DDDude, how can you even defend this? Worst case scenario, the update breaks the game, and it will get unpatched immediately. LIke seriously, PC gaming has been doing well without specialized check ins, so why do consoles need this extra layer of protection for console game patches. If MS doesnt trust the developers, why even let them on the platform?
[QUOTE="RR360DD"][QUOTE="clyde46"] It really says something about that when it takes months to get a patch through. Standards or not, that is not acceptable. bobbetybobWell it says in the article they are working to get updates out faster, so not sure what else people expect really It's idiotic that Microsoft thing a developer is going to patch a game and somehow break everyones Xbox or something. I can understand reviewing patches for the really small XLBA games because some of those are dodgy anyway, but it's not like Bethesda is suddenly going to hack everyones Xbox is it.
On the contrary, the bigger and more expansive the game, the more likely it is to have malicious code or software that could kick your console's ass.
Devs can't account for the PoS 360 hardware randomly giving errors, glitching out, overheating and breaking down when trying to run simple code that could be run on PC's from 2003. That's why devs need to patch the incessant save-game errors caused by the abysmal hard- and software Microsoft has provided them with. Why should devs be held accountable for problems caused by Microsoft's inability to code or make reliable hardware?[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]hell, i'm still pissed that they were pressured to get rid of the patch fee they charged devs for releasing broken crap.
i liked that devs that released a faulty game were punished for itDrTrafalgarLaw
Do you just string random words together and hope they form a coherent sentence?
[QUOTE="RR360DD"]Damn those microsoft for wanting to make sure updates are up to standard before releasing to the public!II_Seraphim_IIDude, how can you even defend this? Worst case scenario, the update breaks the game, and it will get unpatched immediately. LIke seriously, PC gaming has been doing well without specialized check ins, so why do consoles need this extra layer of protection for console game patches. If MS doesnt trust the developers, why even let them on the platform?
Because they are closed systems, and there is a level of responsibility placed on Microsoft and Sony that doesn't exist on PC.
Devs can't account for the PoS 360 hardware randomly giving errors, glitching out, overheating and breaking down when trying to run simple code that could be run on PC's from 2003. That's why devs need to patch the incessant save-game errors caused by the abysmal hard- and software Microsoft has provided them with. Why should devs be held accountable for problems caused by Microsoft's inability to code or make reliable hardware?[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"]
[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]hell, i'm still pissed that they were pressured to get rid of the patch fee they charged devs for releasing broken crap.
i liked that devs that released a faulty game were punished for itbalfe1990
Do you just string random words together and hope they form a coherent sentence?
Come now, my english isn't that hard to follow.[QUOTE="RR360DD"]Damn those microsoft for wanting to make sure updates are up to standard before releasing to the public!II_Seraphim_IIDude, how can you even defend this? Worst case scenario, the update breaks the game, and it will get unpatched immediately. LIke seriously, PC gaming has been doing well without specialized check ins, so why do consoles need this extra layer of protection for console game patches. If MS doesnt trust the developers, why even let them on the platform?
No, worst case scenario, the update breaks the console. Someone has to held liable for that.
I don't think you people grasp the notion of quality control... The process is slow, I absolutely agree, but if it didn't exist, this thread would be about "Bricked Xbox/PS3 following patch" # 2517635 instead...
Seriously, SWs can be incredibly stupid..
[QUOTE="balfe1990"][QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"] Devs can't account for the PoS 360 hardware randomly giving errors, glitching out, overheating and breaking down when trying to run simple code that could be run on PC's from 2003. That's why devs need to patch the incessant save-game errors caused by the abysmal hard- and software Microsoft has provided them with. Why should devs be held accountable for problems caused by Microsoft's inability to code or make reliable hardware?
DrTrafalgarLaw
Do you just string random words together and hope they form a coherent sentence?
Come now, my english isn't that hard to follow.No your English is very good, I'm just not convinced you know what you're talking about. Ironically, I probably should have worded my post better...
Dude, how can you even defend this? Worst case scenario, the update breaks the game, and it will get unpatched immediately. LIke seriously, PC gaming has been doing well without specialized check ins, so why do consoles need this extra layer of protection for console game patches. If MS doesnt trust the developers, why even let them on the platform?[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="RR360DD"]Damn those microsoft for wanting to make sure updates are up to standard before releasing to the public!balfe1990
No, worst case scenario, the update breaks the console. Someone has to held liable for that.
I don't think you people grasp the notion of quality control... The process is slow, I absolutely agree, but if it didn't exist, this thread would be about "Bricked Xbox/PS3 following patch" # 2517635 instead...
Seriously, SWs can be incredibly stupid..
Since when did game patches do that? I've only ever heard of firmware patches bricking hardware.
look at this nerd haha what a fanboy. Everyone is telling you everything xbox related is pure shit nowdays and he just don't want to hear it. Get your head out of you ass at least once a year breh.You should make a pro-Sony thread one day instead of worrying about someything you don't care about.
Loser. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSEEEERRRR! :lol:
timbers_WSU
[QUOTE="balfe1990"][QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"] Dude, how can you even defend this? Worst case scenario, the update breaks the game, and it will get unpatched immediately. LIke seriously, PC gaming has been doing well without specialized check ins, so why do consoles need this extra layer of protection for console game patches. If MS doesnt trust the developers, why even let them on the platform?hoosier7
No, worst case scenario, the update breaks the console. Someone has to held liable for that.
I don't think you people grasp the notion of quality control... The process is slow, I absolutely agree, but if it didn't exist, this thread would be about "Bricked Xbox/PS3 following patch" # 2517635 instead...
Seriously, SWs can be incredibly stupid..
Since when did game patches do that? I've only ever heard of firmware patches bricking hardware. The firmware on the 360 that introduced the new format DVD's with a little bit extra space, bricked a couple of hundred consoles. Luckily, most of them were gifted a new console by Microsoft. But offcourse people lost their savefiles and whatnot.
Ehh....what about minecraft then?ms has always been pissy about updates.
they have this weird fetish about wanting games to be mostly finished and working when they come out.
hell, i'm still pissed that they were pressured to get rid of the patch fee they charged devs for releasing broken crap.
i liked that devs that released a faulty game were punished for it.
this is another one of those thing just like the odd world dev problems topic yesterday.
they don't have the talent to meet the xbla requirements so they make out ms as the bad guy because they can't take the time and cost to make a better product.
Riverwolf007
[QUOTE="balfe1990"][QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"] Dude, how can you even defend this? Worst case scenario, the update breaks the game, and it will get unpatched immediately. LIke seriously, PC gaming has been doing well without specialized check ins, so why do consoles need this extra layer of protection for console game patches. If MS doesnt trust the developers, why even let them on the platform?hoosier7
No, worst case scenario, the update breaks the console. Someone has to held liable for that.
I don't think you people grasp the notion of quality control... The process is slow, I absolutely agree, but if it didn't exist, this thread would be about "Bricked Xbox/PS3 following patch" # 2517635 instead...
Seriously, SWs can be incredibly stupid..
Since when did game patches do that? I've only ever heard of firmware patches bricking hardware.True, that's more likely, but oftentimes wonky patches can play havoc with other parts of the system too. Ranging from crashes to save-bugs to HDD wipes and so on.
The cert process is in place to identify those problems that a patch can introduce.
[QUOTE="RR360DD"]
[QUOTE="Desmonic"] Even indie games had to pay, why would MS change things specifically for F2P games (a genre in which they only have a couple games too)? And yes, you not being able to prove = not being true. Or better it it equals not being true & true at the same time, since we don't know, we have no evidence to indicate whether they pay or not. Logic stops applying when patches are released for PS3 & PC and on the Xbox are delayed by long periods of time (sometimes months), and when even a F2P game is locked behind the pay wall. At least those should be available to Silver accounts.
MS needs to revise it's policies. They do not have the advantage on that field anymore.
Desmonic
Indie games don't have to pay. Have you been listening to anything I said? lol all that was scrapped, arcade titles can be patched as much as they want for free. So its prefectly reasonable to think free games like Happy Wars, WoT etc. can be patched for free as well. The dev never complained about any cost, just time it takes to go through Microsofts certification process.
Lets not forget Sony too charged for patches, so don't lay the blame entirely on MS, however Sony have since said they too don't charge indie developers for patches.
That happened just recently, not during most of the gen. Since 2005 until early this year or late last year (can't remember) indies HAD to pay. So no it's not that straigth forward to assume F2P games won't also have to pay up. I'm not even mentioning the time it takes to get a certification all that much because that's just beyond ridiculous. Yeah Sony charges for their patches(the first one is free, everything else is paid perhaps with exception for the 1st party studios. Should be the same as MS though), but they also never got to a point where a small or big dev refused to patch a game because of their (Sony's) policies.Like I said MS needs to revise it's policies. It's not like they have it all wrong, but it definitely needs some serious improvement.
You can't expect and indie dev with little to no experience to endure months of negotiations to just get one lousy patch in. It's their game, if they f*ck it's their own fault. That's how it works everywhere else and I don't see devs complaining.
So what policies do MS need to revise then? You've acknowledge they don't charge for patches anymore, good. What else? Time they take to review a patch? Okay, well in the link it says the dev is working with MS to get patches out faster. So ... the only legitimate complaint I see is them locking f2p games behind the gold paywall.
There is no negotiation, the indie dev submits the patch and if it passes certification it gets released. If the patch doesn't break anything, then theres no issue. PSN or XBL will never be totally open, so I don't know why people are complaining. You have the option of PC gaming if you want that freedom.
Devs can't account for the PoS 360 hardware randomly giving errors, glitching out, overheating and breaking down when trying to run simple code that could be run on PC's from 2003. That's why devs need to patch the incessant save-game errors caused by the abysmal hard- and software Microsoft has provided them with. Why should devs be held accountable for problems caused by Microsoft's inability to code or make reliable hardware?yeah, it is the hardwares fault. :roll:[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]hell, i'm still pissed that they were pressured to get rid of the patch fee they charged devs for releasing broken crap.
i liked that devs that released a faulty game were punished for itDrTrafalgarLaw
do you even hear yourself?
bottom line here is world of tanks dev wants to drop some unfinished game on xbl and then release patch after patch after patch like they do on pc but you don't want to call them out on it.
few things in sw have ever been more funny to me than watching you guys go after ms over quality control.
Since when did game patches do that? I've only ever heard of firmware patches bricking hardware. The firmware on the 360 that introduced the new format DVD's with a little bit extra space, bricked a couple of hundred consoles. Luckily, most of them were gifted a new console by Microsoft. But offcourse people lost their savefiles and whatnot.[QUOTE="hoosier7"][QUOTE="balfe1990"]
No, worst case scenario, the update breaks the console. Someone has to held liable for that.
I don't think you people grasp the notion of quality control... The process is slow, I absolutely agree, but if it didn't exist, this thread would be about "Bricked Xbox/PS3 following patch" # 2517635 instead...
Seriously, SWs can be incredibly stupid..
DrTrafalgarLaw
There was a $5 million dollar lawsuit brought forward in 2006 following bricked 360's post patch
Patches even from big developers can screw up consoles. Didn't The Last of Us have a patch recently that was bricking consoles? That is not only a big developer but a Sony 1st party. Patch bricking consoles from TLOU? Nope. Least not that I remember. It had an auto-save bug on day 1 (the save file also connected to the online servers, one of which was messing up, meaning you could lose all your progress or not be able to save 1h, 2h, 5h, etc, after your last correct save). But that was quickly fixed on their part.Ok I thought for some reason it was bricking older consoles but it still proves the point that it does not have to be some indie developer. A major 1st party developer released a patch that was damaging customers games.[QUOTE="CanYouDiglt"]
[QUOTE="bobbetybob"] It's idiotic that Microsoft thing a developer is going to patch a game and somehow break everyones Xbox or something. I can understand reviewing patches for the really small XLBA games because some of those are dodgy anyway, but it's not like Bethesda is suddenly going to hack everyones Xbox is it.Desmonic
[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]Ehh....what about minecraft then?i don't know anything about minecraft.ms has always been pissy about updates.
they have this weird fetish about wanting games to be mostly finished and working when they come out.
hell, i'm still pissed that they were pressured to get rid of the patch fee they charged devs for releasing broken crap.
i liked that devs that released a faulty game were punished for it.
this is another one of those thing just like the odd world dev problems topic yesterday.
they don't have the talent to meet the xbla requirements so they make out ms as the bad guy because they can't take the time and cost to make a better product.
Zuzuvela
other than i know i would not consider ever buying any version but the pc one.
[QUOTE="Desmonic"]Patch bricking consoles from TLOU? Nope. Least not that I remember. It had an auto-save bug on day 1 (the save file also connected to the online servers, one of which was messing up, meaning you could lose all your progress or not be able to save 1h, 2h, 5h, etc, after your last correct save). But that was quickly fixed on their part.Ok I thought for some reason it was bricking older consoles but it still proves the point that it does not have to be some indie developer. A major 1st party developer released a patch that was damaging customers games.that was a firmware update last month.[QUOTE="CanYouDiglt"]Patches even from big developers can screw up consoles. Didn't The Last of Us have a patch recently that was bricking consoles? That is not only a big developer but a Sony 1st party.
CanYouDiglt
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/06/18/psa-ps3-users-reporting-bricked-systems-after-4-45-firmware-u/
Ehh....what about minecraft then?i don't know anything about minecraft.[QUOTE="Zuzuvela"][QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]
ms has always been pissy about updates.
they have this weird fetish about wanting games to be mostly finished and working when they come out.
hell, i'm still pissed that they were pressured to get rid of the patch fee they charged devs for releasing broken crap.
i liked that devs that released a faulty game were punished for it.
this is another one of those thing just like the odd world dev problems topic yesterday.
they don't have the talent to meet the xbla requirements so they make out ms as the bad guy because they can't take the time and cost to make a better product.
Riverwolf007
other than i know i would not consider ever buying any version but the pc one.
Minecraft is a indie game with the model is adding more features and content with each patch. Not all games are planning to use patches to fix their game rather release the game early with content unfinished so that they keep the dev studio going with their income from game sales so they can continue to improve the game with new content and features MS policies may aswell screw a 'good' model for patchesDude, how can you even defend this? Worst case scenario, the update breaks the game, and it will get unpatched immediately. LIke seriously, PC gaming has been doing well without specialized check ins, so why do consoles need this extra layer of protection for console game patches. If MS doesnt trust the developers, why even let them on the platform?[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="RR360DD"]Damn those microsoft for wanting to make sure updates are up to standard before releasing to the public!balfe1990
No, worst case scenario, the update breaks the console. Someone has to held liable for that.
I don't think you people grasp the notion of quality control... The process is slow, I absolutely agree, but if it didn't exist, this thread would be about "Bricked Xbox/PS3 following patch" # 2517635 instead...
Seriously, SWs can be incredibly stupid..
Really? since when did game patches affect the system information? im pretty sure worst case scenario, the game stops working. No game patch will ever make the console stop working. Only firmware updates that affect the system files will do that.Ok I thought for some reason it was bricking older consoles but it still proves the point that it does not have to be some indie developer. A major 1st party developer released a patch that was damaging customers games.that was a firmware update last month.[QUOTE="CanYouDiglt"][QUOTE="Desmonic"] Patch bricking consoles from TLOU? Nope. Least not that I remember. It had an auto-save bug on day 1 (the save file also connected to the online servers, one of which was messing up, meaning you could lose all your progress or not be able to save 1h, 2h, 5h, etc, after your last correct save). But that was quickly fixed on their part.
Riverwolf007
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/06/18/psa-ps3-users-reporting-bricked-systems-after-4-45-firmware-u/
Im telling u man, people just making crap up on the spot.
Devs can't account for the PoS 360 hardware randomly giving errors, glitching out, overheating and breaking down when trying to run simple code that could be run on PC's from 2003. That's why devs need to patch the incessant save-game errors caused by the abysmal hard- and software Microsoft has provided them with. Why should devs be held accountable for problems caused by Microsoft's inability to code or make reliable hardware?yeah, it is the hardwares fault. :roll:[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"]
[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]hell, i'm still pissed that they were pressured to get rid of the patch fee they charged devs for releasing broken crap.
i liked that devs that released a faulty game were punished for itRiverwolf007
do you even hear yourself?
bottom line here is world of tanks dev wants to drop some unfinished game on xbl and then release patch after patch after patch like they do on pc but you don't want to call them out on it.
few things in sw have ever been more funny to me than watching you guys go after ms over quality control.
Then all free to play online games are unfinished?
[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]i don't know anything about minecraft.[QUOTE="Zuzuvela"] Ehh....what about minecraft then?Zuzuvela
other than i know i would not consider ever buying any version but the pc one.
Minecraft is a indie game with the model is adding more features and content with each patch. Not all games are planning to use patches to fix their game rather release the game early with content unfinished so that they keep the dev studio going with their income from game sales so they can continue to improve the game with new content and features MS policies may aswell screw a 'good' model for patchesso one game that i would never get on console gets screwed over?ok, i can live with that.
Minecraft is a indie game with the model is adding more features and content with each patch. Not all games are planning to use patches to fix their game rather release the game early with content unfinished so that they keep the dev studio going with their income from game sales so they can continue to improve the game with new content and features MS policies may aswell screw a 'good' model for patchesso one game that i would never get on console gets screwed over?[QUOTE="Zuzuvela"][QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]i don't know anything about minecraft.
other than i know i would not consider ever buying any version but the pc one.
Riverwolf007
ok, i can live with that.
No.....the model for patches gets screwed over So any patch on the xbox wiil just be to fix the devs mess which you seem ot like b*tching about so much[QUOTE="balfe1990"][QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"] Dude, how can you even defend this? Worst case scenario, the update breaks the game, and it will get unpatched immediately. LIke seriously, PC gaming has been doing well without specialized check ins, so why do consoles need this extra layer of protection for console game patches. If MS doesnt trust the developers, why even let them on the platform?II_Seraphim_II
No, worst case scenario, the update breaks the console. Someone has to held liable for that.
I don't think you people grasp the notion of quality control... The process is slow, I absolutely agree, but if it didn't exist, this thread would be about "Bricked Xbox/PS3 following patch" # 2517635 instead...
Seriously, SWs can be incredibly stupid..
Really? since when did game patches affect the system information? im pretty sure worst case scenario, the game stops working. No game patch will ever make the console stop working. Only firmware updates that affect the system files will do that.And? I guarantee you if a patch were to release for say the xbox version Call of Duty, and there was no certification process and it broke the game, every single compaliner would go straight to Xbox support looking for answers.
Thats why Sony and Microsoft have the system in place. They have a responsibility to ensure when you buy a game, it works on their console. Its nothing like PC.
Ok I thought for some reason it was bricking older consoles but it still proves the point that it does not have to be some indie developer. A major 1st party developer released a patch that was damaging customers games.that was a firmware update last month.[QUOTE="CanYouDiglt"][QUOTE="Desmonic"] Patch bricking consoles from TLOU? Nope. Least not that I remember. It had an auto-save bug on day 1 (the save file also connected to the online servers, one of which was messing up, meaning you could lose all your progress or not be able to save 1h, 2h, 5h, etc, after your last correct save). But that was quickly fixed on their part.
Riverwolf007
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/06/18/psa-ps3-users-reporting-bricked-systems-after-4-45-firmware-u/
Ok that is what is was. I guess since there was a problem with a TLoU patch and that update problem I got them mixed up. On another note Sony maybe you need to do better checking on this stuff.Really? since when did game patches affect the system information? im pretty sure worst case scenario, the game stops working. No game patch will ever make the console stop working. Only firmware updates that affect the system files will do that.[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="balfe1990"]
No, worst case scenario, the update breaks the console. Someone has to held liable for that.
I don't think you people grasp the notion of quality control... The process is slow, I absolutely agree, but if it didn't exist, this thread would be about "Bricked Xbox/PS3 following patch" # 2517635 instead...
Seriously, SWs can be incredibly stupid..
RR360DD
And? I guarantee you if a patch were to release for say the xbox version Call of Duty, and there was no certification process and it broke the game, every single compaliner would go straight to Xbox support looking for answers.
Thats why Sony and Microsoft have the system in place. They have a responsibility to ensure when you buy a game, it works on their console. Its nothing like PC.
Dude, whenever a game breaking patch is released, it is usually fixed within 24 hrs. Its that simple, that's how its been for PC, and with a free patch system like the PS4, I dont see why it would be any different. Whenever a dev releases a patch that breaks the game, u know what they do? They just release another patch that completely nullifies the past one aka uninstalls the patch. And then they fix whatever issues and release it again later. You think that if a patch was breaking a game, the developer wouldnt hear about it?[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]that was a firmware update last month.[QUOTE="CanYouDiglt"]Ok I thought for some reason it was bricking older consoles but it still proves the point that it does not have to be some indie developer. A major 1st party developer released a patch that was damaging customers games.CanYouDiglt
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/06/18/psa-ps3-users-reporting-bricked-systems-after-4-45-firmware-u/
Ok that is what is was. I guess since there was a problem with a TLoU patch and that update problem I got them mixed up. On another note Sony maybe you need to do better checking on this stuff. sony should ask ms to quality control their firmware updates.[QUOTE="RR360DD"][QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"] Really? since when did game patches affect the system information? im pretty sure worst case scenario, the game stops working. No game patch will ever make the console stop working. Only firmware updates that affect the system files will do that.II_Seraphim_II
And? I guarantee you if a patch were to release for say the xbox version Call of Duty, and there was no certification process and it broke the game, every single compaliner would go straight to Xbox support looking for answers.
Thats why Sony and Microsoft have the system in place. They have a responsibility to ensure when you buy a game, it works on their console. Its nothing like PC.
Dude, whenever a game breaking patch is released, it is usually fixed within 24 hrs. Its that simple, that's how its been for PC, and with a free patch system like the PS4, I dont see why it would be any different. Whenever a dev releases a patch that breaks the game, u know what they do? They just release another patch that completely nullifies the past one aka uninstalls the patch. And then they fix whatever issues and release it again later. You think that if a patch was breaking a game, the developer wouldnt hear about it?Orrrrr you have a certification process to prevent the game becoming broken in the first place :lol:
This is just stupid
Ok that is what is was. I guess since there was a problem with a TLoU patch and that update problem I got them mixed up. On another note Sony maybe you need to do better checking on this stuff. sony should ask ms to quality control their firmware updates. I think Sony checks all this stuff, but with all the different SKUs out there, and the different settings and the fact that some people have the old 60GB version with bc and some dont, and different people have different HDDs and all that jazz, some times things just go bad lol :P[QUOTE="CanYouDiglt"][QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]that was a firmware update last month.
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/06/18/psa-ps3-users-reporting-bricked-systems-after-4-45-firmware-u/
Riverwolf007
[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]sony should ask ms to quality control their firmware updates. I think Sony checks all this stuff, but with all the different SKUs out there, and the different settings and the fact that some people have the old 60GB version with bc and some dont, and different people have different HDDs and all that jazz, some times things just go bad lol :Pso let me see if i have this topic straight.[QUOTE="CanYouDiglt"]Ok that is what is was. I guess since there was a problem with a TLoU patch and that update problem I got them mixed up. On another note Sony maybe you need to do better checking on this stuff. II_Seraphim_II
when devs release bad games that need multiple patches and when sony releases firmware that bricks the system it is just how the cookie crumbles and we should accept it as how things are.
when ms forces devs to go through a long costly quality control procedure they are bad guys.
is that a pretty fair assessment of this topic so far?
I think Sony checks all this stuff, but with all the different SKUs out there, and the different settings and the fact that some people have the old 60GB version with bc and some dont, and different people have different HDDs and all that jazz, some times things just go bad lol :Pso let me see if i have this topic straight.[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]sony should ask ms to quality control their firmware updates.
Riverwolf007
when devs release bad games that need multiple patches and when sony releases firmware that bricks the system it is just how the cookie crumbles and we should accept it as how things are.
when ms forces devs to go through a long costly quality control procedure they are bad guys.
is that a pretty fair assessment of this topic so far?
That is a pretty fair assessment. Microsoft makes sure patches or updates do not cause harm to consoles or games they are the devil as normal since MS is pretty much always the devil on here. Sony first party releases a game patch that damages customer games and Sony releases a firmware update that bricks consoles, shut up lembot Sony is the only company that cares.
World of Tanks dev, Come to the PS4. Microsoft's moneyhatts only gave you pain and suffering.
Seriously, does this guy read the internet at all? Developers have been complaining about Xbox Live for a while.
I think Sony checks all this stuff, but with all the different SKUs out there, and the different settings and the fact that some people have the old 60GB version with bc and some dont, and different people have different HDDs and all that jazz, some times things just go bad lol :Pso let me see if i have this topic straight.[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]sony should ask ms to quality control their firmware updates.
Riverwolf007
when devs release bad games that need multiple patches and when sony releases firmware that bricks the system it is just how the cookie crumbles and we should accept it as how things are.
when ms forces devs to go through a long costly quality control procedure they are bad guys.
is that a pretty fair assessment of this topic so far?
I think you are completely missing the point. Remember the Fez developer? They wouldnt release a patch for the game because in order to be able to release one, they would have to pay MS a lot of money for the quality assurance checking and all that jazz (eventually MS dropped it and so they released a patch). Sure if you're Ubisoft, that's not a big deal, but when you are an indie developer, you cant afford to pay the thousands that MS requires. So in an attempt to keep all patches glitch free, MS just succeeded in keeping the games Patch-free and people just had to deal with the glitches. That's the problem. The whole Quality assurance aspect is great, but just make it affordable.
I would rather risk getting a faulty patch every now and then if it means I will get more constant patches and updates to my product. So yeah, the game goes down for a day or 2, I can live with that. Its better than having a save game glitch that messes up ur entire experience.
when devs release bad games that need multiple patches Riverwolf007Again this logic? stfu already
[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]when devs release bad games that need multiple patches parkurtommoAgain this logic? stfu alreadyyeah i will take the ms method that has produced the games we see on xbla over the sony method that has produced the games we see on psn.
if there is a greater example of the proof being in the pudding than xbla vs psna then i have not seen it.
you guys cry and cry and cry but the evidence clearly shows ms is doing the right thing.
Don't make freaking indy games for it. They won't even allow you to set your own prices. Just let them choke on their own vomit, and get people to buy a different platform.
It really says something about that when it takes months to get a patch through. Standards or not, that is not acceptable. Bu-bu-but it's quality control to wait 3 months on a patch. :cry: It is quality control. Same reason why Verizon updates for phones are always last. They have to make sure it doesn't brick anyone's phones...look at how many updates have caused peoples' PS3s to fail on them.[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="RR360DD"]Damn those microsoft for wanting to make sure updates are up to standard before releasing to the public!DrTrafalgarLaw
so let me see if i have this topic straight.[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]
[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"] I think Sony checks all this stuff, but with all the different SKUs out there, and the different settings and the fact that some people have the old 60GB version with bc and some dont, and different people have different HDDs and all that jazz, some times things just go bad lol :PII_Seraphim_II
when devs release bad games that need multiple patches and when sony releases firmware that bricks the system it is just how the cookie crumbles and we should accept it as how things are.
when ms forces devs to go through a long costly quality control procedure they are bad guys.
is that a pretty fair assessment of this topic so far?
I think you are completely missing the point. Remember the Fez developer? They wouldnt release a patch for the game because in order to be able to release one, they would have to pay MS a lot of money for the quality assurance checking and all that jazz (eventually MS dropped it and so they released a patch). Sure if you're Ubisoft, that's not a big deal, but when you are an indie developer, you cant afford to pay the thousands that MS requires. So in an attempt to keep all patches glitch free, MS just succeeded in keeping the games Patch-free and people just had to deal with the glitches. That's the problem. The whole Quality assurance aspect is great, but just make it affordable.
I would rather risk getting a faulty patch every now and then if it means I will get more constant patches and updates to my product. So yeah, the game goes down for a day or 2, I can live with that. Its better than having a save game glitch that messes up ur entire experience.
i liked the fee.it was flat out a punishment for devs that did not put enough time into playtesting.
and if the ms method is so horribad and oppressive then why was it not a problem this gen?
i was not dealing with any game breaking glytches this entire gen and in fact the two biggest save game glytches this entire gen was in tlou and the ps3 version of skyrim.
like i said before.
the proof is in the pudding.
and the pudding over on ps3 was by far the worst at exactly what you are trying to claim is the problem with the 360.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment