Here's an idea, how about it gets polished before release.
For games with a shitton of content, I'm not sure it's entirely possible. You just can't have every single combination of stuff checked out after every change
There were 1st level spells that had missing info or flat out wrong info. This is content players are immediately going to interact with.
There's a major NPC whose story line gets broken beyond repair in multiplayer if you don't do things just right. This is only a few hours into the game.
I don't think I'm setting a very high bar here.
Compared to a lot of Triple-A games out there, it is polished.
It's a pretty big game with a lot of variations. And as i said; It just got it's first patch and more are coming.
It took Bethesda about 12 years before they got around to fixing the "Games for Windows Live" thing in Fallout 3. Which literally made the game unplayable. That was a problem.
I'm sure they'll get Wyll fixed for you, if he hasn't already been in this patch.
But now I'm intrigued... If you don't think you're setting the bar high, what games are you comparing BG3 to that were that bug free at launch?
Scope is not an excuse for bugs and I'm tired of people making that argument. If they couldn't deliver this scope as a polished game, maybe they should have reduced the scope.
Gonna be real with you, this is a terrible take. I'd much rather have games pushing boundaries at the cost of some bugs rather than a bunch of the same old regurgitated elements over and over to be safe.
GTA3 had plenty of bugs, the Purple Nines glitch being particularly infamous. Literally nobody out there is saying "wow, I wish they'd stuck with the top-down style games instead of going 3D because this bug has seriously inconvenienced me."
What boundary is BG3 pushing, exactly?
We wouldn't have any games with the stardards you're suggesting. I think you'd be hard pressed to live up to them yourself, if I'm being honest.
No product is without it's faults and flaws.
I'm sorry you happend to be one of the people that got that bug.
If it's as big a deal for you as it sound like, I'd recommend getting a refund. It's as simple as that.
We wouldn’t have any games with the stardards you’re suggesting.
This is the most ridiculous and hyperbolic thing I've read all week.
All games launch with bugs. Not necessarily game-breaking bugs, but bugs nonetheless.
There is simply no way developers can account for every tiny potential conflict in their code. So thank god for the internet and that fixing them post-launch is a concept.
My guy, stop stabbing that straw man, he did nothing to you.
No idea what that's supposed to mean.
The simple solution for you is just not buying games at launch.
You're exaggerating my position to make it easier to attack. In other words, you're trying to argue against a point I did not make. A straw man.
Probably. You didn't answer the few questions i asked.
You said you weren't setting the bar high, but failed mention any other game for comparison when I asked.
Just kept insisting that the two bugs you encountered at launch were completely unacceptable.
I'm just thinking you'd have a hard time with anything that has been made the last 20+ years. It sounds absolutely awful.
I'm not interested in comparing BG3 to other games. I'm interested in judging it on its own merit. And I've encountered far more than two bugs. Plenty of games across 20 years have been released with fewer bugs than this game, what an absolutely absurd comment.
Didn’t they push up release so they would come out before Starfield?
It's pretty damn polished. There's just a lot of possibilities and they rarely mess up. With biggest Act 3 issue is performance is worse, which is expected when you're going from wilderness to dense city. It still runs pretty fine on my old PC on ultra. It's about 25fps, which for top down strategy is fine. I could lower graphics if it were an issue.
We have different opinions on what polished means.
It's very polished considering the complexity and scope of the game.
Agree to disagree mate. When level 1 content that players are immediately going to interact with is broken, I don't call that polished.
What are you referring to?
Not OP but I can at least throw a minor pet peeve in that hat - Mage hand only works once per short rest, instead of as an at will as the cantrip should.
Many spells have/had missing text or flat out worked wrong.
Examples? I haven't seen that a single time
They are literally noted in the most recent patch notes. Shield had the wrong duration (until long rest, VERY different to how it actually works), Warding Bond made no mention at all that the caster also takes damage (pretty key detail). Many spells didn't have listed ranges or areas, I haven't looked to see if those are all fixed now.
Here's an idea, how about it gets polished before release.
For games with a shitton of content, I'm not sure it's entirely possible. You just can't have every single combination of stuff checked out after every change
There were 1st level spells that had missing info or flat out wrong info. This is content players are immediately going to interact with.
There's a major NPC whose story line gets broken beyond repair in multiplayer if you don't do things just right. This is only a few hours into the game.
I don't think I'm setting a very high bar here.
Compared to a lot of Triple-A games out there, it is polished.
It's a pretty big game with a lot of variations. And as i said; It just got it's first patch and more are coming.
It took Bethesda about 12 years before they got around to fixing the "Games for Windows Live" thing in Fallout 3. Which literally made the game unplayable. That was a problem.
I'm sure they'll get Wyll fixed for you, if he hasn't already been in this patch.
But now I'm intrigued... If you don't think you're setting the bar high, what games are you comparing BG3 to that were that bug free at launch?
Scope is not an excuse for bugs and I'm tired of people making that argument. If they couldn't deliver this scope as a polished game, maybe they should have reduced the scope.
Gonna be real with you, this is a terrible take. I'd much rather have games pushing boundaries at the cost of some bugs rather than a bunch of the same old regurgitated elements over and over to be safe.
GTA3 had plenty of bugs, the Purple Nines glitch being particularly infamous. Literally nobody out there is saying "wow, I wish they'd stuck with the top-down style games instead of going 3D because this bug has seriously inconvenienced me."
What boundary is BG3 pushing, exactly?
We wouldn't have any games with the stardards you're suggesting. I think you'd be hard pressed to live up to them yourself, if I'm being honest.
No product is without it's faults and flaws.
I'm sorry you happend to be one of the people that got that bug.
If it's as big a deal for you as it sound like, I'd recommend getting a refund. It's as simple as that.
This is the most ridiculous and hyperbolic thing I've read all week.
All games launch with bugs. Not necessarily game-breaking bugs, but bugs nonetheless.
There is simply no way developers can account for every tiny potential conflict in their code. So thank god for the internet and that fixing them post-launch is a concept.
My guy, stop stabbing that straw man, he did nothing to you.
No idea what that's supposed to mean.
The simple solution for you is just not buying games at launch.
You're exaggerating my position to make it easier to attack. In other words, you're trying to argue against a point I did not make. A straw man.
Probably. You didn't answer the few questions i asked.
You said you weren't setting the bar high, but failed mention any other game for comparison when I asked.
Just kept insisting that the two bugs you encountered at launch were completely unacceptable.
I'm just thinking you'd have a hard time with anything that has been made the last 20+ years. It sounds absolutely awful.
I'm not interested in comparing BG3 to other games. I'm interested in judging it on its own merit. And I've encountered far more than two bugs. Plenty of games across 20 years have been released with fewer bugs than this game, what an absolutely absurd comment.
I would rather have bigger scope but less polish
Didn’t they push up release so they would come out before Starfield?
It's pretty damn polished. There's just a lot of possibilities and they rarely mess up. With biggest Act 3 issue is performance is worse, which is expected when you're going from wilderness to dense city. It still runs pretty fine on my old PC on ultra. It's about 25fps, which for top down strategy is fine. I could lower graphics if it were an issue.
We have different opinions on what polished means.
It's very polished considering the complexity and scope of the game.
Agree to disagree mate. When level 1 content that players are immediately going to interact with is broken, I don't call that polished.
What are you referring to?
Not OP but I can at least throw a minor pet peeve in that hat - Mage hand only works once per short rest, instead of as an at will as the cantrip should.
Many spells have/had missing text or flat out worked wrong.
Examples? I haven't seen that a single time
They are literally noted in the most recent patch notes. Shield had the wrong duration (until long rest, VERY different to how it actually works), Warding Bond made no mention at all that the caster also takes damage (pretty key detail). Many spells didn't have listed ranges or areas, I haven't looked to see if those are all fixed now.
Oh, who cares lol