-
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.
Halo 2 autoupdate is available now!
- Thread starter D-Back
- Start date
Myoclonic Jerk
Member
Suikoguy said:
LMFAO :lol :lol :lol
I fell off the cair laugh .. seriously HAHA ..
ManaByte
Gold Member
To be fair, Microsoft does do a good job helping OTHER companies squash bugs.
When a game is submitted to SCEA and it fails to pass because it has a violation in one of the technical areas where SCEA requires every game to pass in, Sony sends the developer a list of what they failed on and a general idea of where it was in the game.
On the other hand, Microsoft has the same sort of guidelines (as does Nintendo), but when an Xbox game fails to pass one; Microsoft sends it back complete with a list of what it failed on, screenshots of the issues, and suggestions on how to fix it.
When a game is submitted to SCEA and it fails to pass because it has a violation in one of the technical areas where SCEA requires every game to pass in, Sony sends the developer a list of what they failed on and a general idea of where it was in the game.
On the other hand, Microsoft has the same sort of guidelines (as does Nintendo), but when an Xbox game fails to pass one; Microsoft sends it back complete with a list of what it failed on, screenshots of the issues, and suggestions on how to fix it.
Spider_Jerusalem
Member
Spike said:
Aren't these called "content download"? It's like the Splinter Cell single player missions released via Live by Ubisoft: it's additional content targeted to Xbox Live users, but not mandatory for the ones that don't have XBL.
The problem is when patch (intended as someting aimed to solve bugs) addresses problems present not only on XBL games but in the single player experience too: this really shouldn't happen and I agree that a game should be widely tested before launch. But in the real world shit happens, so I'm happy to see the developers to quickly fix it even if only for XBL user. It's better than doing nothing.
You won't catch me bitching about patches like this. Xbox/PS2/GC testing is usually damn rigorous; we're not talking about 100% GAME-STOPPING BUGS that are frequently encountered in PC games and need a patch just so you can fucking beat the game.
BTW, I want to have manbabies with Xbox Live kekekeke
BTW, I want to have manbabies with Xbox Live kekekeke
Society said:
Retarded
Whenever I see this it really hits home how out of touch people are with software devolpment.
I wish to God Nintnedo could have patched Zelda, and Turok 2, but they didn't have a way to. I wish Sony could have patched Grand Turismo 2 and GTA:SA but they don't have a way to. All software has bugs, Xbox games are no more buggy then any other systems.
Halo 2 is about as polished of a game as I've ever seen. I'm sorry your gonna have to spew your silly "M$ suck, they are just out to get your money and ship shit games!" rant somewhere else
MaddenNFL64
Member
Suikoguy said:
:lol
I love the game, but I have to agree a little
.MS (or Sony, or even Nintendo I guess) only checks the 3rd party games to make sure they won't freeze/crash/delete all your game saves/kill your dog/what ever you may think a game could do). They can't really have much input about the quality of the game itself, that's the 3rd party problem.DMczaf said:So where was this at when NCAA 2005 Xbox was sent to Microsoft complete with 100% slowdown? I guess you gotta look the other way when it's one of the big dogs
Society said:
Someone please kick this guy.
By your logic then, The only reason PC games get patched is because of the differences in hardware....have you ever looked at the "list of fixes" in a PC game patch. They usually contain one or 2 gameplay bugs that people find. Hell, Half Life gameplay bugs were popping up for 3 years.
Halo 2 seems rushed? Hahahaha. This is an incredibly polished game.
trippingmartian said:
I know this was a rhetorical statement, but I'll bite, being someone who bought the game primarily to play it offline.
Some people like the idea of a sf action epic that you can play, either solo or with a friend, rather than just watching. Sadly, there just aren't many console games like that. (I'm not terribly interested in 'realistic' FPS's, no matter how cinematic or epic in scope--the motif's a turnoff for me. The Metroid Prime games have the sf angle covered, but the mood's very different--there's a feeling of isolation there, of you, alone, exploring abandoned and alien places.) Between the cinematics and the gameplay, playing through Halo 2 offline is like taking part in a summer action flick. It's a great experience overall--a wild ride from start to finish. Aside from the ending (which some people hate--I don't, but I can see where they're coming from), what's not to like?
Except it doesn't change the "normal" game, the new camera is only enabled when you play through the xbox live interface, with the new ennemies and even more insane difficulty. So it's definitely not a patch.Spike said:
And I doubt a lot of people used the new camera in real fighting situation that much. It's nice to watch around you and look for hidden things, but not really practical when in a rush.
Spider_Jerusalem
Member
Spike said:
You mean it "worsens" the camera :lol - However, I understand your point, and even if it was a real patch (while it is only a way to satisfy some users' requsts), the point is: better this than nothing! Let's get an ipothetic multiplatform game, with an evident gameplay bug repeated on every platform. All of us agree that this shouldn't happen, but *if* it happens, Xbox has an easy and authomatic way to fix it at least for the XBL users, while other platforms can't (except for PC, obviously). Better than nothing. And I'm not even telling that a problem that occurs only on some kinds of HDTVs (a niche market itself) is such a huge bug like a gameplay-blocking problem.
I'm not talking about the 'testing' for a patch, I'm talking about the approval you have to go through to get the ok to get the patch on live in the first place. MS does not want patches on live. MS does not want to encourage developers to feel like they have the leisure to ship a less than finished project and patch it later.
However they do recognize that occasionally its neccessary, at which point it becomes a PR decision as much as it's a technical one. Normally this is why they slip in patches with 'content downloads'. It's not publically precieved the same way.
ManaByte
Gold Member
DMczaf said:So where was this at when NCAA 2005 Xbox was sent to Microsoft complete with 100% slowdown? I guess you gotta look the other way when it's one of the big dogs
EA is scary. They boss around the ESRB and tries to use their publishing power to bully the ratings board into lowering a Mature rating down to Teen. They are also pretty much the only third-party developer who can get any help from SCEA when it comes to putting online gameplay in their titles. There are developers who want online multiplay, but the code SCEA supplies is so shoddy and SCEA won't provide any assistance that they are forced to cut the PS2 Online mode in their title.