The_Perfect_Storm wrote:
Titangeek wrote:
The_Perfect_Storm wrote:
Titangeek wrote:
The_Perfect_Storm wrote:
Titangeek wrote:
The_Perfect_Storm wrote:
Titangeek wrote:
The_Perfect_Storm wrote:
On the other hand such a large game is time-consuming to test. But if it required such extensive testing they should have picked up on most of the problematic game bugs.
How something performs in testing, and how something performs in life are two different things. The tester knows what he is doing, most gamers, not so much.
We're still talking about Fallout 3 here. The problems were unavoidable.
Then why didn't I run into any?
One of the lucky ones.
Exactly, a games might glitch on one computer, and it might not. They got the glitches they found on the computers they used to test it, but not on the ones they didn't.
Speculation.
It's unlikely that all of their copies were fine. If so, this reflects a flaw in their system. Negligence.
Besides, it happened again in the sequel and they missed it again... the odds of that happening twice seem small.
Maybe so, but what you just said is speculation also.
What glitch are you referring to?
Most annoying were game crashes.
And I'm simply pulling stuff out of my ass. There is no good reason that the company would miss those bugs twice in a row. Especially when other companies seem to avoid that problem perfectly fine.
Edit: ... that should say NOT pulling stuff out of my ass. :/
It never crashed while I was playing.
Weird phrase.
I've never played a game that didn't have a glitch in it some where. Fallout had a few yes, but I only found them in the DLC's.
_________________
Always be yourself, express yourself, have faith in yourself, do not go out and look for a successful personality and duplicate it.
- Bruce Lee