Not a Patch on the Original

Steam provides full patch lists

It wasn’t so long ago that, at least on the home consoles, the contents of your cartridge (or disk) held the entirety of your video game and the idea of modifying these contents was both a laughable suggestion and a reason to invest in a gaming computer. Bugs, glitches and even design choices you disliked were to be always in your game and on your nerves, and the workaround was either an official retail re-release or cheating device, and neither of them grew on trees. Given time and technology, our gaming expositions have become readily known to anybody with access to the Internet (read: everybody) and the opinions of a million nerds on what feature(s) of their latest purchase sucks are available to the developers themselves. No longer do we sleep in a bed of Hyper Turbo Championship Special DX editions or tedious patches; there are no excuses for releasing anything other than a perfect product.


Boot up any modern console game for the first time and you’ll almost certainly see an update being downloaded and installed. What does it do? Why do you need it? How can there already be a patch for the game when it only came out last week? So often will these questions run through my head as I wait for some mysterious yet apparently necessary update to be applied to my video game. On the one hand, the sheer ease with which a game can be patched up and fixed raises modern gaming’s hand high above the bloodied mess that were previous generations’ efforts but on the other hand too often will boxes fly up into your face telling you to download something to combat a phantom error that you can’t even read about. Have game developers decided that they can send a game to print while they continue to work on it? You may recall a mild annoyance with Fable 2 and its multiplayer being added as a patch update. It was freely available on release day, but does that excuse Lionhead from showing the public the feature (at that year’s E3 demonstration) and then leaving out of the gold product? I suppose it does, since the content was available immediately and freely on day one. If they had released it any later, then what is now a vague maybe-memory could have been a deal breaker. Let’s not forget that Xbox 360 updates don’t generally tell you what exactly you’re updating your game for, so the difference between a new feature and a minor glitch fix is ambiguous at best.

This sounds all well and good with sweeping statements about theoretical customers, but the truth is that it’s difficult to not notice when a huge update drops (especially with the Xbox Experience) and even harder to care when a small one does. There are very few cases where somebody would actively seek out to learn every aspect of a minor update, and even for the major enthusiasts who would really care that x attack now takes y milliseconds longer to execute, most updates are done in earnest and with only a positive response (if any at all.) Recently, Team Fortress 2 received one such important update which added new maps and weapons in addition to altering existing attributes of the game. Diehard fans, first-time players and lapsed gamers alike were met with an alternate, queer method of providing them with the new weapons from the established “get achievements, get weapons” method from previous TF2 updates: the weapons are given out randomly, regardless of player performance or even participation over a course of time that donates the goodies to some in minutes while leaving others out in the cold for hours until they receive their first unlockable weapon – quite possibly one that they already own from a previous update. It’s the exact opposite of the previously mentioned system where gamers are given an update and not told what it is: Valve slathered the hype upon its fans over the course of a week through its official website with details of the new items, and then made actually getting them a five-hour long dice roll. They had intended to stop users from grinding or hacking the achievements that unlocked the locked weapons, and now players line up to get a spot on a server where they will stand still indefinitely. Probably not the desired outcome.

The possibilities in this networked generation for games to be constantly updated, improved expanded are never-ending. Why nobody has yet fully capitalised on what seems to me as a relatively simple idea is unknown. I want to see lists of fixes, virtual suggestion boxes and seamless content distribution, and I want to be able to access the content I paid for without jumping through any arbitrary hoops. Doubly so if the content isn’t free, and don’t even get me started on locking away content for the sole purpose of selling it to you post-release. I’ll be here all night!

This entry was posted in Opinion and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

3 Comments Comment RSS

  1. The Last Sheikah
    Posted May 27, 2009 at 11:09 am | Permalink

    I’ve been playing for seven hours and just got a duplicate Blutsaugererasaurus. :\

  2. Halfang
    Posted May 27, 2009 at 11:10 am | Permalink

    >Doubly so if the content isn’t free, and don’t even get me started on locking away content for the sole purpose of selling it to you post-release

    Resident Evil 5
    Tomb Raider Underworld.

    Sorry, I had to do it :)

  3. Posted May 27, 2009 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

    I see this argument all over the place. Not always quite as positive as this article portrays, however. But you have to ask yourself the question; does it matter? On the 360 you are treated like an idiot, where the game just tells you there’s an update, tells you to leave the room for a moment while they put down that sweet puppy-glitch you had grown attached to without telling you.

    However, most patches are there for the greater good. With multiplayer games being ever-increasingly the norm for consoles, you have to consider the complexity involved with online sessions. Servers change or get updated for better/smoother gameplay/matchmaking and sometimes the only way to correct such a problem is by issuing a patch for the software which interacts with said severs. Most PC online multiplayer games get patches for the same reasons. It also helps stop cheating which utterly ruins online games and make you less likely to renew your Xbox Live Gold subscription if all people are going to do is cheat.

    You mentioned in the article if it was right that developers continue working on the game post-gold. I’d say “yeah”, if it brings you extra free content then what’s the problem? Valve constantly works on their games after they’ve been pushed out the door and it makes their games even more awesome than they were before. It’s like after-care for your games.

    The industry is in this state because gamers are such thickle things. Part of the consumer-base wants speedy releases yet doesn’t want shoddy products. Part of the consumer-base wants feature-laden products but demands perfection. Finding a balance is nearly impossible. And with games now being ever-so complex, it’s easy to see why patches are being increasingly used when you realise that games have deadlines for their release schedule. It’s basically an extension for developers to mop up what they couldn’t fix/add in the retail version.

One Trackback

  1. [...] posted here: BritishGaming | Not a Patch on the Original // Category: xbox 360 games | Tags: design-choices, glitching, glitching-community, [...]

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*