Bully patch now on Live, but does it fix anything?

Goodness... First the hardware breaks, now the software breaks!

You guys also need to remember, this IS a port to a game originally made for 7 year old hardware. Glitches are bound to happen, certification or not. How many original Xbox game really work perfectly on the 360? None. They all have at least one glitch, though many too minor to mention.

Well Rockstar needs to also remember that I am a paying customer and that if they couldn't port it right then they shouldn't have released it. I mean really, I can understand a few glitches here and there but this game is beyond that. Just read peoples comments on what has been happening to them! Then Rockstar releases a patch that just makes it worse! They either didn't test this game at all or they already knew about all the bugs but figured they could just fix it later. Hopefully they don't do this with GTA IV, can you imagine getting home and putting it in to play only to have it freeze on you with in the first couple of minutes?

I'd blame R*, not Microsoft.

Yeah, but to be fair the 360 is also where the patches arrive promptly (most of the time). I do agree that developers should invest more time QCing their games before going gold. Extra features and content probably goes in towards the end of the development cycle, so bugs are bound to exist, but they also have to stick to release dates.

I wonder how it would be like if games just showed up on retail shelves without warning.

Aside from the typical RRoD stuff, I'm not really sure what else "always seems to be broken."

What is weird is that whether you want to blame Microsoft or not, they definitely have a part of the blame. Microsoft ALWAYS puts the games that are gonna be released on its system through a certification process. So you can't tell me that they did not catch bugs like this during that period!! I don't know about you guys but I'd much rather wait for the game to come out polished rather than deal with this shat when they decide to turn a blind eye to issues like this.

Like how are they helping themselves at all releasing a game that freezes so often, or fails to load the gamesaves properly? In the end the game ends up getting bad reviews and selling bad simply due to word of mouth.

And this is also apparent in some pretty major titles such as Mass Effect, where the image shreds if you move the camera too quickly, and what was their solution to that? Their solution was to set "film grain" as the game setting default so that not all pixels are constantly drawn and at the same time leaving the game looking ugly as hell. But if it wasn't for the pure genius of Mass Effect's story it wouldn't be my favorite game.

it's not MS job to make sure the game is bug free and work fine. MS test to make sure it works on Live, doesn't crash the xbox 360 and that you can complete the game.

das shmildis von also likes to refer to himself in 3rd person, it makes das shmildis von feel important

I know :/ And I paid 34.99

lol

i don't know why you're downgraded- that was hilarious.

Probably 'cause those people have at least once commented in a negative manner on PS3 ports of 360 games, and now the 360 cannot handle a PS2 product. Of course the truth is that a bad port is a bad port is a bad port, period. 360 users are just lucky they get a lot of lead or co development.

For their sake I hope this problem is remedied soon.

It's possible this is related to other things going on, such as variations in retail hardware, the presence of other content on the user's hard drive, accidentally shipping a pre-release version, or plain old fashioned voodoo.

MS is pretty devoted in their QA process. I've never seen them ship a disk with a known crash. Which is not to say that they find them all, but that the people in their certification department do work hard and adhere to their standards when an issue arises. You can fault them for any issues that they may have missed, but you'd have a hard time proving a lack of integrity.

I hardly call people complaining that they spent $50 on a less-than-stellar release full of bugs idiotic. Contingent on income, $50 can be weeks of allowance or a dent in a paycheck.

Regardless to which company did the port, R* owns the project. Do you think that if the game was without bugs and was receiving critical acclaim that R* would say, "no, no, no...it is not us who should get the credit. We owe it all to Mad Doc Software." Likewise, if it ever came down to handing out refunds, I highly doubt that they'll task that to Mad Doc.

Bottom line - R* owns the game, so it's R*'s problem to get it rectified. The bugs should have been caught in the many passes of QA, which is actually PRIOR to beta testing, and R* staff was more than likely involved in the project management and had to give final sign-off (scope verification) anyway. If R*, approved a buggy product that Mad Doc ported, then shame on R*. If they didn't know about the bugs since Mad Doc ported, then that was horrible project management, so again, shame on R*.