double post

If the majority of games you purchase don't work you do have something wrong with your computer, or you have something going on with them (spyware, viruses, old drivers, weird hardware configuration, ect).

Probably owned 7-8 system (and all the upgrades in between) and I rarely have a game that doesn't work...Elemental was the first in a VERY long time.

I don't think the the 90's were some golden age, but I don't look back on them as some buggy time either.  The only difference is back then (specifically DOS times) it required more knowledge on the users part in configuration stuff.  Like setting IRQ's, boot options, and stuff like that.

BTW, the fragile hypothesis only works in a limited scope.  With any given game alone I'd say personal experience is a weak metric to go by.  However going over the course of decades with dozens (or hundreds) of games that observation has a bit more validity.

If 9/10 really didn't work that wouldn't be something to bitch about...that's a freaking epidemic and would literally cripple the industry.  The fact is that's really not the case.  The % of users who have trouble with any given game is normally very low, with a few hear and there that are significantly higher.

Or in human-robot-language:

YOU ARE PART OF A STATISTICAL ANOMALY. 

*BEEP*

PLEASE CHECK SYSTEM SETTINGS.

*BEEP*

REFER TO ONLINE INTERNET DATABASE FOR TROUBLESHOOTING PROCEDURES.

One other thing I've found prevalent among the other game-community and technical forums I've participated in over the years is that less gamers than not are actually running a legit Operating System (of course this again is just my own personal experience so feel free to dispute).

Aside from just being wrong, the above creates a slew of problems for both the end-user and the developer alike.  Over the years that I've been helping out in gaming/technical communities I've noticed the following issues were too often solidly traced back to a non-legit OS on the user's end:

-  system files out of date or missing entirely and causing "strange behaviour" (of course many pirated OS's cannot be updated so........)

-  system services either disabled or completely stripped out of the OS (again either done by the pirate or some gamer who thinks they know what they can and cannot disable)

-  since "updating" the OS is often not a priority (or possible) for many gamers their installations may not have important service-packs/bug fixes and or frameworks/runtimes properly installed.

-  non-legit OS's also often start out crippled in other ways (sometimes in ways which adversely affect overall security) which then cause more damage as the installation is more easily attacked by malicious software.

...etc.

Keep in mind, I'm not calling every gamer a pirate here......I'm simply saying.......it happens (too often in my opinion) where the gamer gets up in arms about a game "they purchased" not working etc. etc....only to find out that the issue was directly related to the "pirated" OS they were attempting to run said purchased game on.

Of course the above-listed issues can also be present even if the user is running a legit-OS and just doesn't update (I know a few of those...hehe) or they don't have internet access to the system in question.  My personal experience has just been that the above issues don't tend to be the root of the problems for legit OS owners that's all.

the Monk

Well, I wasn't snapping (at least not what I would define as snapping), nor was I trying to offend the second guy or start a flame war, whatever that is. But, I'm not one of those "we are the world" hand-holding liberal types, quite the opposite, so if I come off a little harsh to a small subset of people, there's nothing I can do about that .. but it wasn't my intent to "snap." Boy, you should've been in my family when I was growing up if you think that was snapping, my mom would've taught you the meaning of the word. Tact is not a word known to me nor is "political," if the crap in our government today is any kind of example of that word's meaning.

I certainly won't apologize to the guy that feels that consumers (who can't fix a game that was broken out of the box) are "crappy at using their computer and learning from earlier experiences," because there's nothing to apologize for.

Right, so the computer matches SPECS...........what about solving the issue (which I think is an even bigger one) of whether or not the OS and more importantly the STATE of the OS (ie. service-pack/framework/runtime patch-level) matches spec?

How do you propose the DEV's tackle that one?

But therein lies the rub.. the "specs" aren't anything specific. At best, they mention the minimum/recommended amount of RAM and the minimum/recommended "power" of graphics card. The majority of them don't actually list a specific card, just a "xx MB DirectX x.x compatible 3d card".

It is impossible to test every possible hardware and software configuration to make sure that the game works on every conceivable computer setup.

This is why console games just work - every console is running the same hardware and the same software.

You're of course welcome to live in the fairytale land where a publisher can test every configuration of software and software imaginable to make sure that the game works on 100% of the systems it's installed on.. but it's never, ever going to happen.

They also created the thing right under that says people that can't get it to work can return it. You have to remember that the GBOR is written in as much legal-speak as possible. Note it doesn't actually say that they promise the game will work on all computers "within specs", just that gamers can demand that they do.. but they know full well it's impossible to release a game (save something like a content-only expansion) that will not have any technical issues whatsoever, and the next bullet point basically concedes this fact

If we're going to focus on SD and Elemental, it's worth noting that many of the technical issues at launch would've been eliminated if they gave the beta testers access to the finished thing before pushing it out to the shops. They are small and can't really get a huge QA department like say, Blizzard, so they need to rely more on the (willing) beta testers to make sure the game is at least technically ready for launch.. but that didn't happen.

You can expect/demand anything you want. 

The question posed was why do so many games ship with problems. I've given some pretty specific, concrete examples.  You can say it "doesn't matter" all you want but it doesn't change reality.  

The Gamers Bill of Rights states that a game should function without technical problems. If it does, the gamer has the right to return it for a full refund.  This is something Stardock did - provided full refunds to people. 

People have chosen to read a lot of things into the Gamers Bill of Rights that simply aren't there.  You'll note that the GBOR does not say that a game should work perfectly on all systems. Why doesn't it say that? Because that's impossible.  All it can do is say that a gamer has the right to expect the game to work on their system and if not, they should be able to return it.  That's the crux of the first two goals of the GBOR.

Next time you're wondering why all the 1.0 games are coming out for consoles (other than Elemental, name ONE major non-sequel released in 2010 exclusively for the PC) think long on the challenges vs. profitability of making new games for the PC versus platforms with standardized hardware/software subsystems.

PC games will *always* have some level of compatibility problems on release. Always. The difference between a good PC game developer and a bad PC game developer is how they support it AFTER release.  If this is a problem for you, get an iPad.

The point here I think was that cards D, E, F, [Insert Next Letter Here], were not available or made available for testing, so the developers cannot make a definitive statement about whether systems with those cards can run the game without a problem or not. It is not ever going to be the case (and quite reasonably so) that a developer will have every relevant card in the world available for testing.

On a more general note, it isn't just PC games that have caused this mentality among PC users. The very nature of the PC, PC OS's and software have gotten everyone used to the fact that sometimes, shit don't work until you beat it with a hammer, and sometimes not even then, so be prepared to taste the shit-spray with or without the after-dinner mint for your troubles.

Making something as sophisticated as a modern game for the PC platform is like trying to balance a smooth and beautifully shiny pearl on a rickety rain-slick tower of stacked wooden tables in disrepair. In the process you will bang a few support nails in here and there, and perhaps file a groove somewhere on the top surface. It may balance, it may not. To fix this, you need to make the shiny pearl more like a sticky ball of tar. Now of course, the sticky ball of tar is not going to be as attractive as a shiny pearl, so you need to find the threshold where it's enough like a sticky ball of tar to balance on the tables, but still enough like a shiny pearl to make you want it. But who knows how many types of table stacks this compromise will balance on? What if little Johnny threw a two-legged thing into the mix? What if neighbour Frank put a weighty marble surface on the top? What if silly Susie greased up the whole thing?

When computer systems are tested for bugs, problems and compatibility by the people who put them together (hardware, software, cooling and all) half as much as developers test their games before release, we might all be in a more ideal situatiuon. Better yet, if hardware and software makers collaborated more for purposes of compatibility across the board, there would be no excuse for major faults.

The reality is that these things will never happen. Regardless of this, the reputation of game development companies will still be hurt if they don't release a 99% perfect game. This will and does hurt sales, so obviously it is not something the companies want. At the same time, it is not viable to do the amount of testing that is actually needed to get a 99% perfect game, as cost-wise, this would not put the developer in a position to make more games. So, it's not always about greed, at least not with everyone.

Regarding WoM, it has already been mentioned that better measures could have been taken in development and pre-release, and these measures are now a part of policy as a result. Stardock is doing unprecedented things for a game developer to resolve the issues and to compensate, so I won't be attacking that dead horse.

That is right. It is the next step that most people miss I think. That is, if said 'right' is not obtained, then they have the right to a refund..... or a burrito, I can never remember which.

  So Frogboy what's the answer then? I expect some tinkering being a pc gamer, but you know the problems of mass confiqurations are there, how to fix it for your future releases. When you "hire beta testers" does the company actively search their specs or look for someone thats has a spec you havent tested yet?

  Maybe a larger "permanent beta testing staff" that you send your future releases to/ ( i know piracy )/ for testing. Maybe said game for free, it would be a small price to give away 100 games to have that much more user configurations under your belt?

  As a pc gamer, I know I have to go under the hood every once in awhile, but lets not forget some of us can change our own oil and some can't. The goal should be that you don't need to open your hood to play a game. I appreciate your one of a few pc only devs, and we dont want you going the way of the Dodo, in fact to keep pc gaming alive we need more pc only games.

I blame Microsoft. lol.

I can't speak for how the industry should handle it.  I can say what Stardock is going to do is just have much much much longer public beta programs ala Google.  It means jettisoning retail first availability but I don't think that's going to matter in another year or two.