QUOTE(Alize @ Sep 10 2010, 10:06 AM)
That just isn't realistic.
It's very realistic. Add up the total number of games released for the XBox, and the PS2, the Gamecube, the N64, Playstation, etc. Several thousand, easily. Now add up the total number of those games that shipped with important bugs. That's what, double figures, maximum? Offhand I can think of three; Thief 3 (XBox), which cannot be played on any skill level other than normal, Perfect Dark (N64 NTSC, fixed in the PAL version, not sure about the JAP version), which crashed if three people played in the warehouse level, and Space Station Silicon Valley (N64 NTSC), which had two serious bugs, firstly it crashed if you had an expansion pak plugged into the NTSC version of the N64 (the PAL version has this fixed, and reportedly there are fixed NTSC versions), and you can't collect one particular item, so you can't complete the game without cheating (this happens in all region versions, AFAIK).
Granted there are no doubt other bugs in other games on various systems, including probably some very famous bugs, but they were very rare given the vast number of games on the market. There are some very complex games on consoles, yet most are bug free (at least to the end user), and this is due to extensive testing and the efforts of skilled testers doing their best to find the bugs so that they can be fixed. On the PC, on the other hand, where patches could be issued at any time, it became common for companies to release games not fully tested, and use the players (who paid good money for the game), as beta testers, and then the company would release a fix/patch for those bugs, which shouldn't have existed in the game anyway, and wouldn't if the game had been properly tested before release. But the possibility of issuing patches to games "out in the wild" (i.e. in the possession of the games players) allows companies to both release games early (good for sales) and to save money and time by not testing the "finished" product nearly as much as they should.
And when it became possible to patch games on consoles (the XBox and PS2 era), then the rot slowly started to set in. It should be almost unknown for a game to need a fix or a patch, but it's gotten to the stage now where we accept it unquestioningly. And that's a bad reflection on the gaming industry.
Not too sure how many lines of code go into a game, probably in the millions or if not close to. Being a programmer myself, I have heard the phrase "for every 10 lines of code, there is 1 bug" countless times throughout my career - the larger a project, the more likely there will be bugs that may not be identified for a long time,
They will with sufficient testing, especially if the testers include people familiar with the basics of coding in the areas being tested, so that they can help identify the cause(s) of any apparent problems.
hence Windows is so often plagued with problems - over 50 million lines of code have gone into the latest Operating Systems, hackers pull it apart and Microsoft have to fix them. Constantly.
? Windows is totally different to what we're discussing here? We are talking about XBox 360 games, which are finished products, are designed to run on one fixed set of hardware, and are not designed to run third party code or to allow for third party programs running simultaneously.
By contrast, Windows is an operating system, designed to run multiple programs at the same time, on an almost infinite combination of hardware add-ons, which allows for all sorts of third party modifications and intrusions.
There's no comparison at all.
Plus, and let's be honest here, Microsoft are the worst offenders of all when it comes to releasing bugged software and expecting the paying public to beta test for free. If any company other than Microsoft released a product as buggy as Windows they'd be laughed out of the industry. Yet thanks to their marketing muscle and the sheep like mentality of the business world Windows is all but synonymous with PCs in most areas of business.
M$ make some great products (I detest them, but I have to admit that), such as the original XBox, the 360 (aside from the unforgivable failure rate), M$ Office (albeit bloat-ware for so long now), etc, but Windows' problems are appalling.
I'm not sure if Microsoft's policy applies to game patches, probably just DLC. The amount of times I've logged in to certain games and had to apply updates is certainly more than 3 or 4 times! I know those aren't all dashboard updates either.
I have to admit I don't like having patches applied to my 360 when I don't know what they do. I don't trust M$, either technically or morally.