I can't argue with the facts of what Trip is presenting -- I don't know if they're correct or not, but it's not the first time I've found them and I certainly don't have evidence to the contrary.
That said, it's deplorable. What a sad state for the industry that the most economically viable solution, at least initially, is to produce very sub-standard work. Sell a few million copies, go out of business, reform as the same people with a different name, and repeat. That's a bad model for the industry, for the consumer, and nearly everyone involved.
What causes this state? I wish I knew. Is it the infancy of computer software (still under 50 years old, really)? Is it simply a bad business where the expected costs to produce are higher than that of what people will pay? Is it the difficulty in making bug-free products? I sure don't know, but I can hope it's the first of these or something similar, which will go away over time.
It's inherent in the entire software world. Probably the least buggy code anywhere is for console games. What makes those different from PC games? What distinguishes them? I'm not sure. But computer operating systems (yes, linux and unix, too) are riddled with bugs. Phone code is. All kinds of microprocessors and associated code have problems. Why?
Part of the problem, as has been touched on, is that consumer expectations are too low. Will I buy Civ4 as soon as it comes out? Probably. Do I expect it to be anywhere close to bug-free out of the box? No. So why buy it? I expect it to be better than anything else on the market, I guess. Would a baseline expected value help? I don't know. Have TBS games gotten generally better since Blizzard and the *craft series established a baseline that you must meet/exceed? Did that work? Could something similar happen in other genres?
I understand the economics of the situation. I understand a lot of things. I also know I'm not happy with it, in general, and am a willing contributor to not making the problem better. *Sigh* It's very frustrating.
(Side note: Why will I buy Civ4 right away? Is it a craze to have latest and greatest? No...I happily wait for lots of games to hit the bargain bin. Is it a TBS fascination? Perhaps, but I don't buy all the TBS games either. Is it the HOURS and HOURS of fun I've had with Civ3 that I want to recapture? Perhaps. Would I buy Civ4 if Civ3 had never been patched? Doubtful. Boy, introspection is hard.)
I also ask myself -- what about paying for patches? I hate the principle involved there. Even more money stream...we'll intentionally make it buggy -- just buggy enough that they'll want to pay for the patch. Repeat ad infinitum. OK, it may work for Microsoft, but the principle is just too ugly.
Other models? Subscription model? Most people dislike it on principle and it would probably not work out very well for the sellers, either, as upfront money is more likely to be seen as worth it than getting hit up frequently. What else?
I've bought a number of games over the years and enjoyed most of them. But, boy would I like to be able to return a few stinkers as completely NOT worth it -- MOO3 comes to mind. That's just not an option, though, as the CD works...it just doesn't deliver what it promises. Would legal action work? Maybe in detail but it won't solve the underlying problem. Heck, I can't even DEFINE the underlying problem. I just know it exists.
Well, I should've probably stopped several paragraphs ago, but it's Friday afternoon and I just needed to rant a bit. Sorry for the length and the lack of any real meat....
Arathorn
That said, it's deplorable. What a sad state for the industry that the most economically viable solution, at least initially, is to produce very sub-standard work. Sell a few million copies, go out of business, reform as the same people with a different name, and repeat. That's a bad model for the industry, for the consumer, and nearly everyone involved.
What causes this state? I wish I knew. Is it the infancy of computer software (still under 50 years old, really)? Is it simply a bad business where the expected costs to produce are higher than that of what people will pay? Is it the difficulty in making bug-free products? I sure don't know, but I can hope it's the first of these or something similar, which will go away over time.
It's inherent in the entire software world. Probably the least buggy code anywhere is for console games. What makes those different from PC games? What distinguishes them? I'm not sure. But computer operating systems (yes, linux and unix, too) are riddled with bugs. Phone code is. All kinds of microprocessors and associated code have problems. Why?
Part of the problem, as has been touched on, is that consumer expectations are too low. Will I buy Civ4 as soon as it comes out? Probably. Do I expect it to be anywhere close to bug-free out of the box? No. So why buy it? I expect it to be better than anything else on the market, I guess. Would a baseline expected value help? I don't know. Have TBS games gotten generally better since Blizzard and the *craft series established a baseline that you must meet/exceed? Did that work? Could something similar happen in other genres?
I understand the economics of the situation. I understand a lot of things. I also know I'm not happy with it, in general, and am a willing contributor to not making the problem better. *Sigh* It's very frustrating.
(Side note: Why will I buy Civ4 right away? Is it a craze to have latest and greatest? No...I happily wait for lots of games to hit the bargain bin. Is it a TBS fascination? Perhaps, but I don't buy all the TBS games either. Is it the HOURS and HOURS of fun I've had with Civ3 that I want to recapture? Perhaps. Would I buy Civ4 if Civ3 had never been patched? Doubtful. Boy, introspection is hard.)
I also ask myself -- what about paying for patches? I hate the principle involved there. Even more money stream...we'll intentionally make it buggy -- just buggy enough that they'll want to pay for the patch. Repeat ad infinitum. OK, it may work for Microsoft, but the principle is just too ugly.
Other models? Subscription model? Most people dislike it on principle and it would probably not work out very well for the sellers, either, as upfront money is more likely to be seen as worth it than getting hit up frequently. What else?
I've bought a number of games over the years and enjoyed most of them. But, boy would I like to be able to return a few stinkers as completely NOT worth it -- MOO3 comes to mind. That's just not an option, though, as the CD works...it just doesn't deliver what it promises. Would legal action work? Maybe in detail but it won't solve the underlying problem. Heck, I can't even DEFINE the underlying problem. I just know it exists.
Well, I should've probably stopped several paragraphs ago, but it's Friday afternoon and I just needed to rant a bit. Sorry for the length and the lack of any real meat....
Arathorn
Oh how a 'replay' hot button for those battle results and events just not quite up to your liking! 
should get priority status from Firaxis/Atari (although that would probably require a monthly-or-annual fee to make it "worthwhile" to them).
