abartagodd Mar 15, 2013 @ 8:45pm
Game Functionality consumer group possibly needed (?)
Am I the only one getting tired of buying games that only 'mostly' work? Everytime there is a new release, an update is needed almost immediately. I find there is almost always serious glitches that affect game enjoyment, and sometimes the update tanks the game too. I have a few examples in mind, and I'm sure many of you do too.

I'm interested in seeing if there is a percieved need for this, or is it just me. I feel that when I pay for a product that it should operate as advertised. Sims 3 had a glitch that crashed the game out when you tried to save after trying to build a second floor. Fixed in an update, returned with a later update then fixed again.... months later. EA, Ubisoft, and Firaxis are notorious for this. while Ubisoft is a little bit better than the pack it's not enough. One update for heroes of might and magic 6 removed all the files off of the harddrive and replaced them with a new structure. That was how buggy it was, and it still hangs from time to time... a year later.

I'd like there to be a Quality Programming rating. This would at least get the industries attention. Buggy updates would lower the QP rating, while good ones would up the QP rating. It may encourage them to ensure that the game functions as should be expected. While characters image twisting, stretching and jumping around in a early release of AC: III don't damage function it does deminish enjoyment, and doesn't really seem like quality programming to me. Fixed in an update, but after a too long delay.

We the consumers can have a voice, but not alone, lost in a sea of screaming voices. It shouldn't require a big commitment from the many, but It would of a few who would have to organize the info input. I mean if Heroes 6 was about to release and got hit with a QP rating of 5 (out of ten, for simplicity) then they might decide to patch up the problems before release so that it would sell better (I wouldn't pay much for anything under an 8 QP rating, wouldn't buy it all all if it fell under 6).

The bottom line is all they care about, so if you want thier attention, hit them there. They will sit up and listen, cause they are here to serve us, not the other way around.

Any suggestions or advice at this point would be welcomed as long as it's constructive.
Last edited by abartagodd; Mar 16, 2013 @ 8:32pm
< >
Showing 1-15 of 15 comments
Τhe Rolling Cheese Wheel Mar 15, 2013 @ 9:01pm 
It's called reading a review post release. Hell visiting the gamehub post release to read users testimony would work too.

Exercise simple patience and you will be surprised at the amount of money you can save. The reason devs get away with bad games, is because people continue to blindly buy video games.
Last edited by Τhe Rolling Cheese Wheel; Mar 15, 2013 @ 9:05pm
abartagodd Mar 15, 2013 @ 9:37pm 
I typically don't buy till a few months after release for that reason, but my point is holding those that release these titles accountable for thier work. I usually don't pay much for my games anymore, if they worked the way they ought to I might pay more (Battlefield 3 brand new, plus premium package isn't cheap, but it works as advertised so I don't mind), but burn after burn gets tiring. The glitch with the sims was a resurfacing of an older issue. (saved money by buying months later, doesn't fix the fact there have been horrible glitches that rendered the game nearly unuseable)

Besides reading a review is usually moot as they tend to be biased in some direction, or funded by the company itself (I call it conflict of interest), while user testimony is far more accurate, but it still doesn't say 'hey guys, clean up your act a bit.' before you release it. even years later many games are plagued with functional glitchs. It's years after civ V was released, but still has a major glitch with it's workers system, Heroes 6 was released over a year ago, still hangs sometimes on AI turns. Sims 3 has ten expansion packs at least and the game crashing on save glitch took months to fix. That is what I'm trying to address. Reading a review doesn't patch it any quicker, neither does discovering many others have the same problem. If there is no fix, there is no fix. The companies want you to have infinite patience so that they can continue to take the money, knowing there are issues. I've done customer service before, the squeekiest wheels get greased first so that they don't give other wheels an idea. I'm simply saying we should squeek more, besides patience doesn't get really get anything done, and the save money part is lost on me, since this is more of a 'why are we being sold broken product?' deal. I refer to the money as a way of getting the companies ear.

back to the car analogy, it don't matter if the toyota is a 2010, 2011 or 2012, if the gas pedal sticks, then it needs to be fixed, preferrably before they release it to the public, or at least very soon after, not 8 months from now. It gets fixed fast cause it cost them more money not to.

Can you now get a better picture of what I'm saying? I'm not always the most articulate with words, but I'll keep trying to make the message clearer, cause I can see Rolling Cheese missed what I meant, by a long shot. The goal is to close the barn doors BEFORE the horse gets out, who cares how cheap the horse is after it got out, it's already gone.
Τhe Rolling Cheese Wheel Mar 15, 2013 @ 10:56pm 
Originally posted by abartagodd:
I typically don't buy till a few months after release for that reason, but my point is holding those that release these titles accountable for thier work. I usually don't pay much for my games anymore, if they worked the way they ought to I might pay more (Battlefield 3 brand new, plus premium package isn't cheap, but it works as advertised so I don't mind), but burn after burn gets tiring. The glitch with the sims was a resurfacing of an older issue. (saved money by buying months later, doesn't fix the fact there have been horrible glitches that rendered the game nearly unuseable)

Besides reading a review is usually moot as they tend to be biased in some direction, or funded by the company itself (I call it conflict of interest), while user testimony is far more accurate, but it still doesn't say 'hey guys, clean up your act a bit.' before you release it. even years later many games are plagued with functional glitchs. It's years after civ V was released, but still has a major glitch with it's workers system, Heroes 6 was released over a year ago, still hangs sometimes on AI turns. Sims 3 has ten expansion packs at least and the game crashing on save glitch took months to fix. That is what I'm trying to address. Reading a review doesn't patch it any quicker, neither does discovering many others have the same problem. If there is no fix, there is no fix. The companies want you to have infinite patience so that they can continue to take the money, knowing there are issues. I've done customer service before, the squeekiest wheels get greased first so that they don't give other wheels an idea. I'm simply saying we should squeek more, besides patience doesn't get really get anything done, and the save money part is lost on me, since this is more of a 'why are we being sold broken product?' deal. I refer to the money as a way of getting the companies ear.

back to the car analogy, it don't matter if the toyota is a 2010, 2011 or 2012, if the gas pedal sticks, then it needs to be fixed, preferrably before they release it to the public, or at least very soon after, not 8 months from now. It gets fixed fast cause it cost them more money not to.

Can you now get a better picture of what I'm saying? I'm not always the most articulate with words, but I'll keep trying to make the message clearer, cause I can see Rolling Cheese missed what I meant, by a long shot. The goal is to close the barn doors BEFORE the horse gets out, who cares how cheap the horse is after it got out, it's already gone.

Any wise consumer would read multiple reviews from different sources to get a clear overview of quality on the product.

I just gloss over your wall of texts because I can't be bothered to read in to your awful analogies and comparisons. Instead of getting to the point, you decided to use various off the wall cases of buggy games to create support for some ridiculous group/system that is unneeded during the age of the internet. Did it even occur to you that such a group/system could also be bias like the reviewers?

If people can't be bothered to research a product before buying them, perhaps they do deserve to get shafted by the greedy publishers/developers. I have no sympathy for fools that buy blind. The secret to beating the greed of publishers and developers is to stay informed and vote with your wallet.

Also your system sounds almost as idiotic as metacritic.
8 Quality Programming... what does that even mean? Is the game going to run flawlessly 8/10 times upon launching or something?
Last edited by Τhe Rolling Cheese Wheel; Mar 15, 2013 @ 11:02pm
KIDZAP Mar 15, 2013 @ 11:57pm 
If you can't figure out a 10 point voting system as in 1 - 10 you'd be better off sticking to reading the sunday comic strips. I think abartagodd has very valid points. The problem is, and has always been, with commercialized computer programs once you bought it you own it. No recourses are available. When game software is released it's at best a beta version. Now I say this because it's vitually inpossible to test the program on every pc configuration being used. When Blops2 crashes on occasion I see a pop up box that's reporting the crash to Microsoft for investigation. I never see a pop up box telling me that information is being sent to Steam, Valve or Treyarch. So I'm hoping Microsoft passes this information along to the game developers to fix the error that caused it. As for sifting through reviews, you can take most of what the reviewer says with a grain of salt as most are biased and paid for by the manufacturers. As an example, when Sony released the PS2 they knew that systen had major issues but they released it anyway and let the consumers take the brunt of the headaches and long hours on the phone with the tech reps. The bottom line as always, they got your money and you got shafted. Unfortunately you can't rent a PC game as you can an Xbox or PC3 or WII. I do agree reading reviews helps but the only way your going to find out is the hard way. Buying and making your decision after the fact.
abartagodd Mar 15, 2013 @ 11:59pm 
I can tell you glossed over, cause you keep missing what it's really about. namely getting the companies to fix the glitches BEFORE they release. If your not paying attention to that which your commenting about then you are being foolish, shooting from the lip to sound smart. Plus why would you quote the entire previous post? everyone can see it above yours... Sounds like your one of those high on yourself types that thinks everyone else is the idiot and your the only smart one in the bunch, and that's just your ego. I'm really not interested in getting into a flame war with a teenager to be honest. If you had something constructive to offer, go for it, but so far you just seem upset that someone would try to improve things for everyone. I thank you for your 'humble' opinion as it is actually allowing me to bounce some ideas around here. Sometimes a critic can point everything in the right direction, sometimes they are just caught up in thier own hubris. Life goes on, world isn't over

I'm looking for input as to how you would create a system like that, it would need more than one benchmark, of course, but the average of those benchmarks. All I've done is propose a system. I find most people have a life (outside of video games), so time they can devote to research may be a bit limited and this could save time. I know you tried hard to sound brilliant, but if you really wanted to scuttle it, and sound intelligent, why not bring up how difficult it would be for the average joe to know about the glitches before it's released. The system would have to focus on post release without insiders, and including insiders may skew bias.

Of course bias occured to me, hence my comment on reviews. (Lmao, no ♥♥♥♥ sherlock) I'm looking for how can I make a user input system work, which kinda kills the bias unless you skew the results.

Not sure what you mean by off the wall games though. do you mean not mainstream, of which I'm pretty sure assissin's creed 3 is, or if you mean purchased in a store, which I buy through steam... clarification would be cool. Not trying to knock you here, honestly. Different people have different ways of phrasing.

we all vote with our wallet, sure, but I also see everything else has a standard it has to pass before being sold. If a game is released and hardly works, then it seems like we're missing that standard in this industry.

If it were up to you, how would you keep bias down? how would you benchmark and what would you benchmark? as for the number itself, 8/10 could mean that the game itself functions, but has a few quirks, or has quirks with a few machines out there that have to be worked out. A 4/10 could mean tha the game crashes unless you play in a specific way or have only a few computer configurations that it works with at the time being.

The idea is to isolate it's functionality apart from the game story. The game could be about killing zombies or picking flowers, niether i'd be too wild about, but the rating would tell me if I should expect a lot of errors and crashes.

thank you kidzap, that is exactly what I'm talking about. accountability.
Last edited by abartagodd; Mar 16, 2013 @ 12:10am
abartagodd Mar 16, 2013 @ 12:39am 
Xbox360's initial release was just as shoddy with the constant 'red ring of death' problems, it was so bad that there was a designated team to deal with it, why couldn't they designate the team before it was released? There could be bugeting issues there, but if they're not allowed to bring it to market like that, then I'd bet those bugeting issues would be magically solved. I never got hit by it, but I also had to wait an extra year for it to clear, they didn't even have a decent warranty at first till they got pushed by the competition, and bleeding money, into extending it from three months to a year.

If we had a consumer watchdog that could nix a release based on a functionality standard, then you would see some serious changes. Take a peek through any game based forum, it doesn't take long to see that there is a prolific problem here.

I'm interested in creating solutions to this issue. If you have a better idea of how to go about this, I want to hear it. I don't have the thickest skin when it comes to criticism, but I always try to leave my ego at the door.
V-10 CLUB Z Mar 16, 2013 @ 1:33am 
I agree with you but I just refuse to buy any game on release so I don't get screwed over anymore. I wait not just for reviews but a consensus on the PC version. So if RockPaperShotgun and TotalBiscuit sign off on a game that it works fine I would get it.

But I'll just say that you are right and while I did sort of skim through this thread (it's really late and I'm tired) I will give it a proper read later.
Last edited by V-10 CLUB Z; Mar 16, 2013 @ 1:34am
Gus the Crocodile Mar 16, 2013 @ 6:36pm 
Originally posted by abartagodd:
we all vote with our wallet, sure, but I also see everything else has a standard it has to pass before being sold. If a game is released and hardly works, then it seems like we're missing that standard in this industry.
Uh, no, everything else does not have to pass some standard. I can put whatever kind of terrible music up for sale that I like. I can write four pages of nonsense, print it and put it in a bookshop. If people think they're ♥♥♥♥ and don't buy them, that's my problem and my "punishment" - I've spent time, effort and likely money that I may not get back. If I sell something that's actually broken, that's not fit for purpose, then at least here in Australia, people can get their money back. Again, I think that's a great system for discouraging unfair practices and I think if other countries (hi, America) don't have such strong consumer protection law, then that's the angle they should be working.

The major problem, as I see it, with your approach, is this:
If people aren't buying games you'd consider "low quality", then clearly there can't be an issue. But if people are buying these games...then who are you to say they aren't doing so willingly? Maybe they've made up their mind and come to the conclusion that the game, while not perfect, is okay.

If all this was to happen post-release, then there wouldn't be any need for a discussion: you could start a website right now and get to assigning ratings to any game you please. And anyone who cared to listen to you could. But you're talking about making some sort of required step in a game's development process? That's...well, I was going to say absurd, but let's go with unrealistic.

First of all, do you know how many games are releasing, all the time? And you're going to get permission to obtain and publically rate pre-release code of every game? Even ignoring the mass amount of "bugger off" responses you'll get from devs, who's paying for the immense time investment here? If you plan to only rate some games, then that in itself introduces bias in your system, and perhaps loopholes for people to escape being part of it.

Secondly, why would I, as an intelligent consumer, want some third party's opinion on game quality potentially interfering in the release of games I'm interested in? If I don't think a game is good quality on release, I won't buy it. If you don't think it's good enough but I do, your ratings are irrelevant to me, so if you hold up developers at all, you are doing me a disservice. And you will never agree with everyone, so you will always be doing some people a disservice.

What I think you should do, since your main cited problem seems to be that people aren't yelling loud enough about games with serious issues, is START YELLING. Make your own site, and write about the problems you see. Write well, be rational, spread the word, and hold people to account. We have the internet these days; you can do this stuff well even without major backing.

In the meantime, I'll keep reading reviews by people who I trust (RPS), and making up my own mind about what I buy. For me, one of the primary strengths of PC gaming is that unlike the walled gardens of Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Apple etc, anyone can make whatever they want, no matter what other people think of it. I do not want that changed.
abartagodd Mar 16, 2013 @ 8:11pm 
Once again, I'm not advocating censorship. I'm advocating quality of function control. HUGE difference, one that keeps getting missed.

I'm in canada, we do have consumer standards to a degree, but I'm aware that they aren't that high. By standards I mean they can't make a metal box, paint Ipod on the side and sell it as a music player. If your selling a music player, it has to play music otherwise you get charged for fraud. There has been repeated confusion between content and function, and I'm trying hard to seperate it out. I'm starting to see when people see the word quality, they link it to content, where I mean quality of function.

Australia, Canada, USA, Sweden, etc actually DO have industry standards for economic protection. It's just games aren't typically seen in that same light that we sell other products with. The standards deal with fraud and public safety, which encourages consumer confidence in the marketplace.

I agree that the content should never be limited, that part is all consumer choice, but If I sold you a music CD in a store and it was a blank disc in reality, that would be the issue to deal with. the music can be crap, my problem, but if your disc was labelled AC/DC and advertised 12 songs on disc, but got 2 songs and the rest played as static so you couldn't access the content you paid for, then that is the problem that needs fixing.

It did dawn on me later that It'll never fly pre-release, and in the ninties games were delayed because they had to make sure the game functioned otherwise they opened themselves up to fraud lawsuits. As the market got flooded faster than law could keep up (no surprise there) the definition of functional shifted in favour of the developers. (Imagine angry birds crashing if it hit a green guy)

I purchase indie games like Limbo, and have plant tycoon and other 'Easy Bake' games, but the point is they function. It won't crash if I clip the wrong branch, colors don't invert due to planting a seed. Not every one likes black and white, or watching grass grow, I agree. My aim is function, not content fixing. I've purchased games that have good reviews, but the functionality is questionable.

I had a war game that wouldn't trigger the next mission so I ended up stuck in an empty field everytime, till they updated and fixed the glitch. I'm not going to dispute the content of the game, but the fact they sell you a game and tell you there are fifteen missions, but you can only play the first two before it glitches and prevents you from playing the rest. That would be a function issue. In another turn based type, It would kick you out to desktop randomly, effectivly deleting the last hour of progress. I could save every turn, but when I got to that turn it would boot me. Start a new game and I could go way longer, but every once in a while it would crash out, and you'd have to start a new game cause it would crashe there everytime. I'd go back three saves even and change my actions to try to divert the crash, but it was fruitless.

If I can't ledge kill in the new assassin's creed then thats a GAMEPLAY quality issue, not my aim to hinder the developers choices there, but if the game froze everytime I tried to ledge kill then thats a FUNTIONALITY problem, my aim is to tackle that issue. Wasn't impressed that decks are limited to certain cards only, but that would be a GAMEPLAY issue, If it crashed everytime I added giant growth to my deck, then that is a FUNCTIONALITY issue. I want to address FUNCTION, not content. It really seems like everyones concerned I want to alter what is expressed and that is NOT the goal. I play all sorts of whacked out games and normal ones too. I love the creativity. Hunting games aren't for me, but I believe that if thats what people want, give it to them. If they are selling it as a game were you can hunt duck, bears and werewolves, cool, but if everytime you shot the duck the game froze then the game is shoddy in construction.

I want indie games and all varieties to florish, but I don't want to buy a game that is unplayable. I had one that would crash everytime I tried to save, I bought it because I wanted to create and build, but without being able to save (which is a basic function) I couldn't progress. Since I'd be targeting function, opinion doesn't factor in. If it works all the time - Greenlight, if it crashes everytime you toss a bomb off a cliff - yellowlight, if it crashes because you selected the warrior instead of the mage or cleric - redlight (if I'm not allowed to select the warrior why is it an option?)

Opinions would be rendered moot, because it comes down to quality of function.

It's all well and good to yell whatever, but a fool and his words are soon parted there. If I can get an educated, focused, unifed chant going that is hard to ignore, I'll go much, much further than the crazy guy who yells on the corner of my street.

yes I do know there are well over a thousand games released weekly, globally, but Gus, can you see you addressed content there? that has nothing to do with what I'm trying to do. I want to target the shoddy game mechanisims that prevent us from actually using the product we purchased.

I do want to thank you for weighing in though, I'm not going to discourage opinion, that's human will and a human right to have one. I agree with what Gus says, but what he says still doesn't address the issue of this thread.
Last edited by abartagodd; Mar 16, 2013 @ 8:13pm
abartagodd Mar 16, 2013 @ 8:21pm 
perhaps I'll try to reword the thread title, since I'm getting a lot of content concerns. I'll try to keep it boiled down to the function concern to clarify. It is a lot to read all at once (I usually have an editor, but here I'm running wild. I apologize for the length, I thought it would clarify, but it seems to be confusing the issue...)

As a film maker I'd freak if someone censored what I had to say. Though I'm sure you'd freak if the film I sold you only showed chapter 1 and the rest remained unviewable.
Last edited by abartagodd; Mar 16, 2013 @ 8:28pm
Gus the Crocodile Mar 16, 2013 @ 8:56pm 
I think the reason you have a hard time separating content from function in videogames is that in this medium they aren't separate. Music isn't made of functions - it's just data, and your music player has functions to play the data. But games are made of data and functions: that is, functions are part of the content of a game. So separating content and function is impossible. What you'll be doing is assigning various importance ratings to different functions within a game. Which is a subjective process, unless you want to get into code analysis or collect gameplay information from players to eliminate at least some bias (and you can't do the latter on a useful scale pre-release).

Your fraud examples are not the most helpful, because (generally) fraud is illegal, and is illegal regardless of what's being sold: you don't need separate fraud laws for every single kind of product on the market.

Originally posted by abartagodd:
Since I'd be targeting function, opinion doesn't factor in.
Of course opinion factors in! If I tell you that, say, Oblivion (no mods, for argument's sake) crashes to the desktop occasionally on my PC - averaging maybe once every six hours of play. How do you translate that into your quality rating?

The only objective thing to do is to simply report my data (assuming I didn't make it up). You'd say, "one person reported this game crashed roughly every six hours". Now, that's easy when you only get a few reports, but PC configuration variation being what it is, one report is next to useless. Also I think it's important to realise that these "I'm playing a war game and it won't let me continue to the next mission" reports are pretty conveniently cherrypicked. Not saying they're invalid, but in the wild, it's very common for bugs to be much harder to track down, identify and reproduce. It might let you continue, but only sometimes. It might let you play fine when you test it but die completely on someone else's machine. So you need more reports. You need to run the game on all sorts of PCs under different conditions, to collect lots of data on when and how often bugs occur.

And once you have enough data to make meaningful reports, it's no longer practical to just present it straight up. The most objective way to proceed then would be to construct graphs or the like. But you want to go with a rating of some sort, which inherently involves losing information, and necessarily involves important subjective decisions. You can stick to an objective scale of some sort (crashes to desktop = -2 points or whatever), but whatever scoring system you come up with, you arbitrarily chose it. Who are you to tell me that one crash to the desktop every six hours is worth -2/10 (or whatever)? Personally it's a very minor inconvenience considering how fast the game loads. If a crash when you select the warrior is a "redlight", but a crash every time you throw a bomb is only "yellowlight", then what's a crash that happens 3% of the time you select a warrior or 1% of the time you throw an item that the player can only find two of in the game? How are you coming to these conclusions? It's necessarily based on your opinions of how important various functions are, of how much playtime an average player might lose to bugs, etc etc.

Of course, like I said earlier re code analysis and gameplay information collection, perhaps you can collect data on these things too and act on at least measured averages of some sort...but that's another multiplier on the amount of work involved.
Last edited by Gus the Crocodile; Mar 16, 2013 @ 8:59pm
abartagodd Mar 17, 2013 @ 12:14am 
Originally posted by Gus the Crocodile:
I think the reason you have a hard time separating content from function in videogames is that in this medium they aren't separate. Music isn't made of functions - it's just data, and your music player has functions to play the data. But games are made of data and functions: that is, functions are part of the content of a game. So separating content and function is impossible.

I think you might be confused. I'll try to clarify.

Content would be the story, music and 'look' of a game.

Function comes from the command structure.

In development, you first have to design and build the structure, which dictates how it will function. After that is built you then fill it with content. Two completely different parts of the program

In music you have whats called a 'table of contents' that is the structure of how it's formatted, how the data is directed, length of file, title, etc. It the gets filled with content, the music itself. If there was a lack of function then your music would come as one long file that you'd have to fast forward and rewind through. With a functioning structure you can then skip through songs without guessing at where the start is.

as for the 'cherry picked' game it's called Battlefield 3. It was released for xbox360 (plus PS3 and pc, but the example was taken from the xbox release, to reduce hardware variation.) the bug was later fixed by update so variations in hardware and operating structure was reduced for this example.

I could have chosen 'True crime' for the xbox/ ps2/ pc. That had a fine structure for pc and ps2, but the one released for xbox was actually a build version as opposed to the final version, and no action was taken to fix it. The company continued to sell a product that they knew didn't work right.

Though in sims 3, if you built a second floor, you could keep playing, but if you saved the game would crash you out to the desktop without saving (frustrating). Quick loading? maybe Oblivion is, but sims 3? lol nooooooo. it loads to get to the menu then loads to play the game. After ten times I had better things to do. over 200 000 players had the issue and EA still took it's sweet time fixing it. It would have been better to go back to the previous update, fix the major bug and issue a new update once completed.

While PC's of course come in a wide range of variations, there are 'mainstream' configurations that encompass the most common configurations. I expect it would take longer to find bugs in the more customized configurations, that's natural.

The redlight and yellowlight, 1-10QP ratings are arbitrary, meerly examples at the moment as a system with benchmarks hasn't yet be really proposed. It's the easiest thing in the world to tear apart someone else's ideas, but it takes much more effort to build and create.
This is just a fact finding mission. Nothing has really been proposed as for the system itself. First we have to work on what it should target and how it can target it effectively.

As for fraud laws, I clearly stated I'm NOT looking to change the law, or even amend it. Gov't, Law and routes like that are slow, archaic and ineffective to address the speed at which the market shifts. It's 'we the people' that have to make these changes, If you change how an entire group approaches the market, you can then effectively change the market for the good of everyone, and business practice then is forced to change or perish. I've also been trying to point out that existing fraud laws actually can deal with it, but percpetion of the product has to change first in order to enact it. I frequently see games not percieved as products, maybe perhaps because that they are digitally built, not sure why. As intellectual property that gets produced, it is a product, but functionality is viewed as grey area. There are ligitimate reasons for that. Though if functionality were defined (and lack of knowledge of game structures fuels this problem) then it gets simplier in defining 'below acceptable standard of function'. Without the definition, the resulting 'acceptable standard' and a accountability that follows, we are defenseless against that type of fraud.

As for a single case of crashing, lets be honest, no one cares. If your the only one with the issue, then it's most likely (but not absolutely) something you did. Now if 250 - 600 cases (still small beans, but more significant) of crashing occur along the same vein then it can begin to reveal where the glitch is originating. If the glitch originates from hardware or software configuration that could be used as a minor benchmark. If the glitch occurs and your using the recommended hardware they suggest that would be a bit more of a major benchmark. If exiting a building caused a color glitch that would be minor, but still worth noting. If exiting the building caused the game to crash or hang up 5 times out of 10, then that would be a little more major as it hinders your ability to actually play the game.

I'm still looking at the second to last paragraph you posted though as that has the most useful criticism there. I'll spend some time seeing if I can come up with a solution for that.

"the problem isn't the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem"
Captain Sparrow

I qoute him here cause I'm seeing alot of attitude over this subject, but not many constructive solutions.... which I find odd. Is there people out there that actually like that thier games crash a lot?

I'll edit the intro on monday, I think it's creating confusion.
Last edited by abartagodd; Mar 17, 2013 @ 1:24am
Gus the Crocodile Mar 17, 2013 @ 1:27am 
Originally posted by abartagodd:
I think you might be confused. I'll try to clarify.

Content would be the story, music and 'look' of a game.

Function comes from the command structure.
I'm not confused, I disagree. Games are made of rules. Game design involves the creation and organisation of systems of rules. Therefore, in games, rules are content.

But okay, everyone can have their definitions. Thing is, if you want to insist that content is "story, music, and look", then it is absolutely not the case that earlier I was only addressing content. So have it whichever way you like.

Originally posted by abartagold:
The redlight and yellowlight, 1-10QP ratings are arbitrary at the moment as a system with benchmarks hasn't yet be really proposed. It's the easiest thing in the world to tear apart someone else's ideas, but it takes much more effort to build and create.
I could also say it's the easiest thing in the world to have a empty overview to a problem but never present any details to fill it in. Please don't post your ideas on a public forum and then get all defensive about people pointing out flaws in them, that's really boring.

My argument is that your ratings will remain arbitrary because there is fundamentally no way for them to not be so. If you want to remain objective at all, you need to present the data without judgement, not transform it into ratings. There, that was a constructive suggestion, right? I'll be happy to listen to any other ideas anyone has about how a system like that you're talking about would actually function.
abartagodd Mar 17, 2013 @ 2:09am 
Originally posted by Gus the Crocodile:
I could also say it's the easiest thing in the world to have a empty overview to a problem but never present any details to fill it in. Please don't post your ideas on a public forum and then get all defensive about people pointing out flaws in them, that's really boring.

I'll agree with you there, I opened this forum for input. I really try hard to not be defensive and be more objective, I don't always succeed at it, but I do try.

I was trying to convey the idea I'm looking for help at this stage to point me in the right direction and discover which details will be the best to focus on in order to start proposing a system. It's a daunting task, but I believe it can be achieved. I agree also that the second half of the second quote you posted of me was a bit snarky. I apologize for that.

I'm gonna agree to disagree on the content part though. When I used to build games I always created the framework of the world first. Then could produce multiple games on the same structure. If the structure rules failed then the game would crash to desktop, but if the content I added had failures then they would show up as visual anomalies, but wouldn't interrupt the structure function.

right now I'm at the overview stage, and ya that was the easy part, sorta. Trying to locate the best ways of targeting the issue is my goal. When I collect enough data and have a better idea of how this would function better I plan to start working in more details, and if someone else has a better way to benchmark this, by all means proposed solution. I want input.

Don't get me wrong, I like you Gus. You've given me a few things to consider and that's what I'm looking for. Your last two posts have good points for me to consider, and I do appreciate that.
abartagodd Mar 19, 2013 @ 5:12pm 
Ok life snowballed on me on monday and I won't be able to designate brain power to this till friday.

This has been an interesting exercise for me, so I'm going to inform myself some more this weekend, before deciding the the best way to move this disscussion over. As I look at it. Gus is right, I'm being too defensive over a conceptual idea. If I edit the intro too much it may make the posts responding to it seem off. I may just start a new discussion with a new approach.

I'm going to keep pushing at this issue till something gives. I've also been trying to combat hacking in BF3 for console, though I may have bit off more than I can chew. :/

I'm going to try and brush up on my editing skill as well so that I'm not so long winded.
lol, try talking to me AFK, I shoot from the lip and ask questions later, lol. (O_o).
Last edited by abartagodd; Mar 19, 2013 @ 5:13pm
< >
Showing 1-15 of 15 comments
Per page: 15 30 50

Date Posted: Mar 15, 2013 @ 8:45pm
Posts: 15