- cross-posted to:
- gaming
- nottheonion@lemmy.ml
Xbox exec: “Every QA person in our… company [is] playing Starfield right now.”
You must log in or register to comment.
Thats not really a high bar now is it?
The bar for this is so low, Derek Zoolander is asking if there are ants drinking at it.
The only bad bugs I’ve ever really noticed in Bethesda games are occasional crashes and those seem to get ironed out for me in post-release updates. It’s anecdotal, but I’ve never had a problem with bugs in Bethesda games like everyone else has apparently.
A lot of buggy releases often aren’t attributed to lack of number of QAs (which helps you find rarer bugs). The simple fact that crazy common bugs any QA probably immediately found and filed, yet was triaged and determined lower priority to other worse bugs the dev team was busy with. Then deemed not stop ship worthy to some exec trying to hit a date.
Does anyone actually care about the bugs though? I’ve never really been bothered unless they literally break the game (the Skyrim Giants are iconic now lol) I’d say the real problems are completely unfinished games and games that have serious performance issues eg. Battlefield 2042 and TLOU
I will happily take a very buggy launch over half-baked design - especially in an open world Bethesda game.
If a launch similar to Fo4 or Fo76 means we don’t get a progression system like constellations from Skyrim (inconsistently balanced and with many missing the point of the tree entirely) I will be glad
There were mods that third parties later out out that significantly-changed the Skyrim progression trees. I hope that Starfield is amenable to modding.
Except fallout 76 wouldn’t even run on my (well spec’d out) rig until the two weeks after release. That was terrible. That wasn’t just buggy. That was actually unplayable. In contrast, never had a single game breaking but in FO4, though Initially did see some weird texture loads.
So only a game breaking bug every other quest then.
What was the previously least buggy Bethesda game?