@Carpetfluff Sorry I just don't see it that way. $30,000 (actually $40,000) to fix a bug that effected maybe 1% of all players. It probably would have been cheaper just to give the money back to the people effected. Except there is no way to prove it so you can't do that. I agree that Fish can be a d***, but I don't blame him for not taking the hit. Did less bug checking then they should have? You can bug check all you want, that doesn't mean you will find every bug. How do you know what Fish knew before he released the game? M$ is to blame here, just another example of how they are ignoring the indie scene.
@fog90 @brxricano @DarkSaber2k I don't understand the hate for Fish over the patch issue. Microsofts policy is at fault here. something like $30,000 just to re-issue the game with a TINY code patch? Nonsense, this game was made by ONE GUY, not a megacorp developer funded by EA. I don't care how successful the game is, $30,000 is a huge hit for one person to take. Microsoft should have let him patch the game at no cost.
Xian042's comments