Who develops the patches?

[Eternal-Souljah]

Is it EA or Dice? I should no doubt know this but someone clarify it. Bassically im wondering how incompetent an company can get, I mean the simple task of employing staff who have a clue on how to create the patches without messing up, but whats worse is that they take months to make a new patch, but they can't even test it through to its fullest, to make sure that theres no issues. Im bringing this up because im really ticked off with this piece of crap patch that I have no choice but to use. A lot of the time I can't even get one game, for instance right now I had like 40ish points from caping flags and 9-1 k/d, but I didn't notice the private bug. I get no points, exit reconnect still pvt bug.

Restart comp go into a different server, still private bug, exit log in, connect to another server, crash to desktop. Just a rant yeah, but what im getting at it is EA that creates the patches isn't it? well what im trying to say is, how can a company so massive, on a large scale, they dominate a large sector of the games industry, how in the hell can they make mistakes like they do, bugs here and some of them such as CTD, how can you make that mistake? if your so large a company you have tons of $$$ and they make more bugs, and don't even bother to fix many of them. I honestly never have a problem with EA, there products are fine, and BF2 is a massive game, very popular all over the world, yet EA manage to destroy BF2's huge reputation releasing garbage patches and listening to some 10 year old who got killed by a helicopter and wants it taken out of the game.

I usually adapt to the crap that they put in the patches, some of its been good, but other things are terrible. I'm not having a whine, well I guess I am? but im just frustrated with it. I get connection errors constantly on some servers, then on Wake the round nearly ended had a pretty good score server crashes with the connection error. Same happened on Operation Road Rage. EA better hurry up and release there patch which fixes this CTD, and I wonder what else will get nerfed.

[imported_Mercenary]

Re: Who develops the patches?

DIce creates patches, DIce makes BF games, EA is the publisher

[Eternal-Souljah]

Re: Who develops the patches?

DIce creates patches, DIce makes BF games, EA is the publisher

So why does everyone say ''**** EA'' etc, if its DICE releasing the patches?

[imported_Mercenary]

Re: Who develops the patches?

they're dumb, they just don't know, all EA does is publish the game....DICE just has issues making patches.

[RocketChild]

Re: Who develops the patches?

I actually think it is DiCE Ca that makes it. The group that originally made BF2 is no longer supporting it and has shifted to 2142.

[imported_Mercenary]

Re: Who develops the patches?

It might be DICE cacnada who made it, instead of DICE stockholm who originally made the game, maybe that's why the patches suck, they're just like BFV.

[AlphaCueUp]

Re: Who develops the patches?

i guess DICE learned their lesson, and is sorry.....evidence is in the fact that they release open-beta and are taking the feedback to make corrections....

ppl complain that patches take too long.....then when they get a rushed patch, they complain that there's bugs........

from what ive heard, DICE programs/develops, but EA sets the deadlines

[colony]

Re: Who develops the patches?

[RS-Rom]

Re: Who develops the patches?

The monkeys in EA call the shots, I would think. No matter who does what, whoever calls the big shots must be smoking something bad.

[Revoluti0n]

Re: Who develops the patches?

I actually think it is DiCE Ca that makes it. The group that originally made BF2 is no longer supporting it and has shifted to 2142.

You are correct. Dice Canada makes the patches for BF2. They also created Special Forces.

[Eden]

Re: Who develops the patches?

Listen Up!

I recently learnt a few things not to long ago when talking to a game developer. Basically things work like this, Dice (developers) code the game they make it how ever that's really where it stops, EA (publishers) then come into the scene they say when the deadlines are, when things need to be done but even further they say what stays in the game and what goes.

And example is a cut-scene someone was working on, great cut-scene however the publisher thought it was to long and told the developers to cut it down, right down. there nothing they could do they simply had to cut it down.

That in the end is how its done with EA at least, there are a few good publishers out there who generally let the developers go free but two things stop EA from this, there to scared do do something new and exciting and all they want to do is make as much money as possible.

great example of this is Nintendo with there Wii which is something new and revolutionary and Sony with there PS3 wich will be selling the same boring games as the year before and the year before that (think GT but with more AA ebnbled thats what youll find the PS3 selling)

[RocketChild]

Re: Who develops the patches?

Listen Up!

To add to that!

This could be the biggest problem with game companies having to answer to stock-holders. I don't think Nintendo has to answer to shareholders or meet/beat Wall Street estimates.

I have had/have three co-workers that have in someway-shape-or-form worked for EA. They all paint a dark picture of their business practices. EA will buy small software companies out, then after that company spend a large amount of capital to develope a new title, EA might shelf it because it does not seem like it is a market viable product. EA will only release top 10 games. If you are in one of the 30 software companies they own, two out of three game titles developed will not get distributed after they are completed. That leaves the programmers that have spent two years of their life on a product out in the cold and possibly unemployed because some person in an office "feels" the market is not right for someone else's idea.

Someplace I heard EA has a game life expectancy(store shelf-life). What it is, I am not sure. But I figure that is it much shorter then other software houses. DiCE seems to know there are serious problems with BF2 at the core and is ready to move on. EA, is also reacting with such to get whatever they have on the shelf out the door so they can more all efforts to 2142. 1.3 was rushed out because AF had been done for months, but delayed because of prior patch issues from EF.

DiCE is very lucky they have a great product, and the community demands it. DiCE could find itself back to making console games if EA pulled the strings. You know, this is what happens when a bunch of MBAs get together and look at the bottom line. They were never taught to "dream". In reality, it is the dreamers that make the company money.

[imported_Mercenary]

Re: Who develops the patches?

yeah DICE made RallySport challenge for XBox, that game is very good!

Also, nintendo is making the most profit here. What people dion't realize is nintendo is the most greedy bastards in the gaming buisness. The wii is just a damn gimmick, nintendo fanboys will buy it no matter what, nintendo is fooling people buy acting like they're so inovative and graphics dont matter. The real reason is because they don't want to make a console that costs alot to make for them, but they want to make a cheap console that will seel for more than it's worth. So even though they will not get 100 million people buying it like SOny has peop;le buying the PS2, they will actually make profit from every console sold. Those greedy bastards....

Sony is selling there PS3 for a huge amount, if the games are also high it will fail. But that's very unlikely. What'll prolly happen is that they will still come out #1. They have way too many fans(inlcuding me) anbd way too many fantastic franchises.

[[TEC]Wolf_Holic]

Re: Who develops the patches?

Listen Up!

I recently learnt a few things not to long ago when talking to a game developer. Basically things work like this, Dice (developers) code the game they make it how ever that's really where it stops, EA (publishers) then come into the scene they say when the deadlines are, when things need to be done but even further they say what stays in the game and what goes.

And example is a cut-scene someone was working on, great cut-scene however the publisher thought it was to long and told the developers to cut it down, right down. there nothing they could do they simply had to cut it down.

That in the end is how its done with EA at least, there are a few good publishers out there who generally let the developers go free but two things stop EA from this, there to scared do do something new and exciting and all they want to do is make as much money as possible.

great example of this is Nintendo with there Wii which is something new and revolutionary and Sony with there PS3 wich will be selling the same boring games as the year before and the year before that (think GT but with more AA ebnbled thats what youll find the PS3 selling)

I agree with the above quote, Company's have developers quickly code products to get it out there for the public to buy, and tell the developers don't worry about the bugs we'll fix them later, hence the games all games have issue's don't blame the programmers so much as to the Publishers/Owners..just remember coding you don't see how the action is you just see numbers and text in front of them..and all it takes is a period to be in the wrong spot, and wham..walking thru walls..

[RocketChild]

Re: Who develops the patches?

Well, it comes down to a developer having to pay their employees, pay for their workstations, studio/building cost, licensing, etc...only have so much working capital till they need to get the product out the door. If it is delayed 3 months, that is three months they have to pay developers. They have to start recooping costs at some point and if they release a game somewhat close to ready to go, they can start making money back to further their development of the just released product.

It sucks, and that is where someone like EA comes in that can help with the upfront money to continue developement...but, sometimes(often) it bites a developer in the *** because they have to get it out the door early because they signed their souls to the devil.

As I recall, EA only had a partial stake in DiCE, but through some backhanded dealings, they got full control.

You ever notice how some of the best games come someone that has never produced anything? Then the second game they make sucks? Well, often it is because they had to sign-on with someone like DiCE or Activision to get the intial game out, only to have closed out for the second release.