So according to Kotaku, the game was okay to launch not to screw over consumers, but because they thought the game was just good enough to let out into the wild.

How does this keep happening? So many games last holiday season released entirely busted, with the Master Chief Collection being the cherry on top of it all. We're not even close to the holiday launches, yet here we are with another game, more denials of knowing anything was wrong, and I'm sure the backtracking will begin shortly.

When does it stop? Or how? Are there any solutions to this beyond hoping that somehow the gaming masses as a whole just flat out stop pre-ordering games and expansions? Do gamers need to hold off and wait to see if the games work before actually buying them on day one?

Is it bad that I'm even making this about gamers? Where's the true accountability in the industry? So many games released in Beta mode. So many "video game journalists" writing reviews that conveniently never find that these games are practically unplayable or severely limited. I didn't buy this game, and the only reason it was on my radar is because I have co-workers who have been ranting about how unplayable it's been for them since it came out, but then this article popped up and wow.

I guess the only way I can tie this back into Bungie is that I hope they never release something going forward that's just outright busted/largely unplayable. :\

Yeah, I don't get it. Its just insane that a game coming out without major bugs or crashes or network issues is the exception and not the rule. Makes me glad that I very rarely buy games first thing. Destiny was my only preorder since... Reach I guess.

Polygon gave it a 10, so it must work okay somewhere. Wonder if they'll amend their review.

I'll probably buy Mirror's Edge day one, but I might wait for others that are coming soon.

This might seem like a no-brainer to some, but one I'll struggle with is Halo 5. Old habits die hard, and I like what I've seen. The campaigns in MCC worked fine for me, and that's what I care the most about in Halo.

Polygon gave it a 10, so it must work okay somewhere. Wonder if they'll amend their review.

They played the console version that's why, I have it, and it plays almost perfectly :)
(The PC version was outsourced to a 3rd party developer)

Polygon gave it a 10, so it must work okay somewhere. Wonder if they'll amend their review.

They played the console version that's why, I have it, and it plays almost perfectly :)

Yeah, I figured.

(The PC version was outsourced to a 3rd party developer)

Ah well, there you go. Did we know that previously? Given how smooth the arkham games have been, I would not have expected problems.

Do you think the console version deserves a ten?

Polygon gave it a 10, so it must work okay somewhere. Wonder if they'll amend their review.

They played the console version that's why, I have it, and it plays almost perfectly :)

Yeah, I figured.

(The PC version was outsourced to a 3rd party developer)

Ah well, there you go. Did we know that previously? Given how smooth the arkham games have been, I would not have expected problems.

The boss of WB revealed it I think the day after release (after it had already been pulled which he says they supported)

Do you think the console version deserves a ten?

I'm always hesitant to give any game a number score, but I definitely think this is the best Batman game ever made. The batmobile sections sometimes feel a little forced, but I still enjoy the batmobile A LOT.

Ah well, there you go. Did we know that previously? Given how smooth the arkham games have been, I would not have expected problems.

The weird part is that I'm pretty sure it was done by the same company responsible for Arkham Origins Windows port, which works just fine. Rumor has it they had a very tight deadline this time.

I'll probably buy Mirror's Edge day one, but I might wait for others that are coming soon.

If anything's a safe bet, it's Mirror's Edge. The time it took them to even do a second game, plus everything I've heard out of the team so far, has me convinced that the people working on it are doing it for the right reasons. How exactly that happened inside such a massive company, I have no idea. But someone there gets it and is very dedicated to doing it right.

In my experience this is because of patching. The dev has a shelf date that they have to hit, contractually. So they print DVDs of the game that they know are buggy as hell, hoping that they'll be able to keep working on a patch for the game during the 1-3 months of manufacturing and initial distribution.

In this case, they failed.

But any time you buy a game and get a day 1 patch, this is exactly what's happening. The company released the gold master to the manufacturers with major bugs, and they're patching what they can before you ever get to see the game.

This also is not a new phenomenon. Hidden and Dangerous needed like 9 patches before you could play past the 3rd level. Vampire the Masquerade needed a patch that was written by a fan to correct for some major bugs. And those games are very old. Pretty much ever since the internet became a thing, some a-hole said "I can make more money if I release this before it's ready and just hope I can get a patch done by the time it actually hits store shelves."

- No text -