Jaffe: No patches on the heels of release, please

Thursday, 3rd March 2011 00:09 GMT By Brenna Hillier

David Jaffe has said platform holders should limit the number of patches developers can release immediately after launch, to counter what he perceives as unacceptably buggy titles and barriers to game entry.

“Hardware manufacturers, I feel, should only allow one to four updates to the software per game per year,” he said during a panel at GDC, as reported by Joystiq.

“None of them should come within the first one to two months the game is shipping.”

“When I first started, when the disc was shipped it was our last chance [to get rid of bugs] off the bat,” added.

“If developers could make it work then, then today they can at least make sure our games don’t have to be updated the first week they hit shelves.”

Although the God of War creator’s comments poked at buggy releases, the topic of his micro-talk was reducing the time between putting in the disc and playing the game – a period which can be seriously blown out by patch download and install time.

However, Jaffe also suggested a firmware feature which starts games by loading a recent save file, bypassing logos and menus.

Jaffe’s comments about limiting patches are in opposition with those of developers like Valve, who have been vocal in their detraction of Microsoft’s laborious title update review process.



  1. ninjanutta

    He is 100% correct,jaffe does say it how it is,which i respect.Devs these days put out half assed products because they know they can patch it later which is a piss take for the consumer really,unfortunatly,this has become the norm now.

    #1 4 years ago
  2. AbracadaverAK

    I don’t think so.

    Games are big business now, so publishers are often eager to get games out as soon as possible, especially if the title has already been delayed. Given the time between a title going gold and it being released, devs could have fixed performance issues or bugs that can be applied for day one purchasers.

    There’s absolutely no good reason for limiting the amount of updates you can make to fix a piece of software. It’s counter-productive and I can’t think of a single reason it would make any game better.

    #2 4 years ago
  3. hitnrun

    Throw in DLC as well, and you’ll really be pushing my buttons.

    @2: Well, for one, the limit wouldn’t be implemented for its face-value restrictions, but rather for coercing publishers to not have to release a torrent of patches, i.e. by finishing the damn game.

    #3 4 years ago
  4. DuckOfDestiny

    Even though I really like the guy and Wish Twisted Metal to be a success, now it will be fucking hilarious if Twisted Metal is released with a major bug, requiring a patch.

    #4 4 years ago
  5. ninjanutta

    i dont agree with the limit on patches but i strongly agree with the trend that devs rely on patching poor tested games after release.greed is the key factor,the way of the world,money,money.

    #5 4 years ago
  6. Grimrita

    Totally agree. It’s clear now a lazy culture has developed. Why should gamers who part with their hard earned cash wait months for fixes that should have been there from day 1.

    The Total War series on the PC is a prime example of such lazyness. There’s no doubt in my mind that QA spot the holes in the AI but someone at Sega points that it must be released on X date, we can fix it in 7 months time…unacceptable!

    #6 4 years ago
  7. Gekidami

    I disagree, games need to get updated and changed according to feedback. Whats a 5min wait to download a patch if its to rebalance a weapon thats unfair or crush an exploit people are using?

    Bugs and unbalanced weapons will ruin a game, waiting for a patch to download wont.

    #7 4 years ago
  8. Grimrita

    Patches for balancing, for me, is a different thing. Theres no excuses for releasing games with actual bugs. Bad Company 2 and its bullet proof leaf and stupid hit boxes is another example.

    #8 4 years ago
  9. aleph31

    Completely agreed. I’m buying DA2 next week, but I’m worried it’d come out with lots of bugs. I’d prefer to be able to wait 1 month or so until they release the initial patches, but I think I will not be able to resist the temptation.

    In short: updates are ok, but titles should come with more QA hours, launch releases have been lowering the quality standards lately

    #9 4 years ago
  10. Blerk

    I like his idea of being able to boot straight into your last save without having to twiddle your thumbs through all the bullshit every time.

    #10 4 years ago
  11. IL DUCE

    Fortunately, updates are not a problem for the 360 since they take like 15 seconds, I recently bought a PS3 and have had the 360 for 4 years but damn, the worst thing about the PS3 is the updates that take absolutely ridiculous amount of times before you can play a game and that’s definitely one advantage the 360 has over the PS3, I do enjoy the Bluray on PS3 and the technology may be better but I still prefer the 360 all around, controller wise, game wise, achievements. I basically I got the PS3 for the Sony exclusives, the Bluray and PS Home. If you want to play a game on PS3 you need to mark it on the calendar or put the game in the day before you wanna play it because you just never know, Ex. DC Universe Online (put that bad boy in over night and played it the next day).

    #11 4 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.