Rocky 1,224 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 These days it's not unusual to see games have 2 or 3 patches, the first one might even be released the same day or week as the actual game. There's two schools of thought about that. Firstly "Well done the developer!", for supporting the game and issueing the patch so quickly. Secondly you have the opposing opinion that the game must have been rushed out and they should not have released it in such a state that required an immediate patch. A patch it might be added that the majority of customers might never hear about (i.e. we aren't all logging onto the net everyday). That's not the debate I want to start though! What about games that NEVER EVER got patched?! Do you know of any? Is it because the publisher did not support the game, or because it was perfect right out of the box?! The closest I could find was "Prince of Persia the sands of time". This game was released about 2 years ago and got high acclaim all round with scores very similar to todays Splinter Cell Chaos Theory for example. But PoP was never patched (apart from one specifically for one particular GFX card), unlike each of the 3 Splinter Cell titles which have all been patched. Anyone else got a game that was never patched? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Whisper_44 0 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 Anyone else got a game that was never patched? ← Raven Shield Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rocky 1,224 Posted April 28, 2005 Author Share Posted April 28, 2005 Anyone else got a game that was never patched? ← Raven Shield ← You know what, I thought of that game as I was typing my post, but unlike you I managed to refrain from mentioning it. I suppose it would be unfair to have any topic on patching without mentioning the king himself though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GRT 0 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 First to Fight but its been about a week and a half from release but alot of people are having problems where it wont even install. Could you imagine buying a game and it not even being able to install right. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Whisper_44 0 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 (edited) I would say that as Owner of the greatest GR & R6-Series Fan-sites, you would have to refrain from comments like mine, but I couldn't resist, wouldn't be able to sleep tonight if I let that one go Edited April 28, 2005 by Whisper_44 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteKnight77 1 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 I have to say, that even though there was a patch, maybe two for the original Splinter Cell and I have them downloaded mind you, I never patched the game. I never saw any problems until I got the version that came with my sound card. There was a special patch issued for it by Ubi due to crashing at the elevator on the Kalinintek level. I never patched the original SC and played it completely through with no patching what so ever. To me, it was perfect right out of the box. Sure, there are those who had some problems with it, but honestly, it was mostly hardware related as in not having the proper video card (no SC game has supported a GF MX card period) that I saw. I don't recall a patch being issued for FSW either. I don't know if it were a lack of problems with the game or lack of support. I will say that I have not found any dev or publisher forum for FSW and if you need support like I did previously (and am having the same problem again mind you), that support requests have remained unanswered from the support page. I don't recal any other game I have not needing to be patched at least once, maybe twice at the most. None have needed patching like the abortion that was RvS (I am not afraid of making comments against the game whatsoever even though I am staff here and at Aggression). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
firefly2442 0 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 I think the problem is developers and publishers realize that pretty much everyone has an internet connection and is able to download patches no matter how big they are (56k sucks by the way). I mean, look at the consoles, you can't create a bad game and release it only to patch it before it's even released. That's the one thing that I like about consoles. I don't own a console and I don't plan on it in the immediate future but I do really like how games are released in a finished state. But then that begs the question, if a publisher didn't release a game and continued to work on it and patch it to the point of pretty much complete playability, would you want to wait? Do you have the patience? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
magnumkp 0 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 I usually only ever bother to patch MP games, and that's usually just to get on the servers. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rocky 1,224 Posted April 28, 2005 Author Share Posted April 28, 2005 I think the problem is developers and publishers realize that pretty much everyone has an internet connection and is able to download patches no matter how big they are (56k sucks by the way). ......← Did you mean to say "realize"? Perhaps "assume" would be closer to the truth. Publishers do assume people can download big patches, or else they really should be holding onto game releases until they are verified stable. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
firefly2442 0 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 Yes, that's what I meant, thanks. Bad word choice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cpl Ledanek 247 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 Same here with Full Spectrum Warrior. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dick Splash 23 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 CoD and CoD UO got some more patches last December [1.5 I think]. One of them is server based and one actually has a brand new MP map which I think's brilliant. Especially seeing as CoD came out thirteen months before the patch There's a thought, knock out the inevitable patches for GR3 PC and include an extra map here and there as a sweetener. What am I talking about, I'm on 56k *boo hoo* DS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteKnight77 1 Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 CoD and CoD UO got some more patches last December [1.5 I think]. One of them is server based and one actually has a brand new MP map which I think's brilliant. Especially seeing as CoD came out thirteen months before the patch There's a thought, knock out the inevitable patches for GR3 PC and include an extra map here and there as a sweetener. What am I talking about, I'm on 56k *boo hoo* DS ← I have the patch for ya, I just need a few extra bills to mail the disk for ya. It's a bear being unemployed ya know. Quit your sniveling. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
NightCrawler 137 Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 Freelancer, though they did a patch for those that host servers, the player never "had" to have the patch. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.