Who develops the patches?

Re: Who develops the patches?

I thought that the 1.3 was made by a monkeys for a scientific experiment

Re: Who develops the patches?

Restart comp go into a different server, still private bug, exit log in, connect to another server, crash to desktop.

I get the crash to desktop regularly. Usually it just before the "join now" button appears after the map loads, bam, looking at my desktop. Or sometimes it waits till after the "join now" appears, but as soon as I move my mouse to click it, bam, desktop.

What bugs me is when I'm playing and I have to release a key before I can press another, or nothing will happen. The last game I bought that did that was back in like 96/97. Thought forsure that was completely gone. Still havn't figured why you can't run and shoot at the same time, but that's not what I'm refering to.

More like holding duck and strafe and it won't let me shoot until I let one up, along that line.

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.

I see this allot when a game mfg is working on expansions for their game instead of correcting issues with the original. One of the many reasons I don't support expansions. Doom3 and HL2 are some that pop into my head off hand.

Later

Re: Who develops the patches?

LONG POST PLZ SKIP K THNX


i also read alot of accounts from post-EA employees. there was this whole issue of wage-level employees not being paid overtime or something, incredible stress put upon everyone, creativity cut in order to sell. lets not mention the MADDEN series, which new versions are released every year, where the biggest changes are updated rosters :P. in the end though you really cant blame them. they are out to make a buck, most of what they do is legal (if not ethical) and we as consumers still buy their products encouraging this. i for one love certain publishers that give much more freedom to their developers. creativity is what started and advanced the early videogame movement, sad to see stagnation like this. i think the only hope for indie devs are in-place distrabution systems. STEAM for one, is a great model for getting the word out in the PC community. the XBOX live system has wild potential for encouraging indie console games (but microsoft might be a little hesitant to that) but its definitly very very hard for a couple of guys in a garage to get a game on store shelves (although vivendi did a great job getting DOD, and CS into play).

as for the whole wii issue:playstation has officially alienated me with their arrogance and distance with the community. a new final fantasy and metal gear solid wont do it for me to buy their 600$ overhyped computer. Considering playstation top brass has admitted most of their games could be run on XBOX 360 equivalent hardware, xbox live will trump any online service sony offers, and that Blu-ray isnt enough of a driving force to buy (stupid format wars), PS3 is gonna appeal only to techo-philes (not to mention that whole possible 10% yeild sony's cell production will probably have...8 processors in 1, too bad all 8 have to be defect free on the same wafer, thats gonna be damn hard). i was a ps1&2 fanboy, but ps3=meh. xbox360 is ok, pc does it for me though. Wii is the only console that really sets it self apart from pc and consoles. plus, its gonna be tons cheaper (250 or less for the system, 40 or less for the games!) and will be great for playing with friends (only reason i see to getting a console in the first place). all in all, my votes for wii.

[RocketChild]

Re: Who develops the patches?

People still play Counter-Strike 1.6. And you're saying that graphics matter. It's the game play that will make you replay the game many many times. As for the greedy bastards that sounds kind of harsh. Microsoft and Sony are a lot more greedy then Nintentdo. Just because Nintendo didn't spend millions of dollars on development of a new CPU and high priced video card doesn't make them greedy. They want to deliver some thing that is affordable and doesn't cost $400-$600 dollars. Plus that controller seems interesting.

OMG!!! you wrote the exact thing I wrote, but I deleted it out because I did not want to speak my mind! But since you said it...Ya, graphics do not trump a good game.

And when it comes to greed...well, everyone want to make a profit and we all need to learn that is part of the game. How much profit and what we should expect to get as a community is a different story and can be debated at length...till it gets locked.

[face-smasher]

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.

People still play Counter-Strike 1.6. And you're saying that graphics matter. It's the game play that will make you replay the game many many times. As for the greedy bastards that sounds kind of harsh. Microsoft and Sony are a lot more greedy then Nintentdo. Just because Nintendo didn't spend millions of dollars on development of a new CPU and high priced video card doesn't make them greedy. They want to deliver some thing that is affordable and doesn't cost $400-$600 dollars. Plus that controller seems interesting.

[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.

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..

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.

[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.

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)

[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.

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.

Re: Who develops the patches?

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

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.