There are only so many permutations a developer can test while building their game.

I'm sorry but that is bullshit. Yes, there are a ton of different configurations available on PC, and no, they cannot possibly test them all, but it's fucking insulting to suggest that this is the biggest reason that games launch broken on PC. Not only are you going to knowingly ship games that are horrendously broken with glitches so obvious and so universal that there is no conceivable way that you couldn't know that they existed, but now you're going to use your shills at IGN to treat us like we are stupid?

"treat us like we are stupid"

Not without merit...
We are the one who continue to pre-order games.

Oh no doubt, but just because someone sometimes does stupid things doesn't give me the right to treat them as utter knuckle-dragging idiots

Outsource game QA to StarLoop, Testronic, Keywords Studios/VMC, GlobalStep, and Pole To Win if studios won't invest in proper in-house testing. No excuse for launching broken games at a $60-70 premium price. PC's open-configuration nature is not a valid justification.

My guess is that when you are spending millions on marketing sometimes the suits just want you to hit a release date hell or high water. I can hear some CEO saying "If we push back the release people will think there are problems behind the scenes", then he probably sexually assaults someone in the room.

I am just guessing though.

Why pay for QA when people pay to play early with bugs?

Kxmode wrote on May 22, 2023, 23:08:
if studios won't invest in proper in-house testing.

You're missing the point. The studios know the games are broken. As long as they still get massive pre-orders, they have no reason to ship a fully functioning game.

There are only so many permutations a developer can test while building their game.

On a large enough scale, this is true. On a realistic scale, it is not.

Back when I worked in game development, There were literally hundreds of different physical hardware configurations that were tested above baseline. Baseline being the minimum spec with a driver and OS base that was two stable releases back. So, let's say you had an Nvidia card. Two WHQL releases back and up would be tested. Let's say the box/specs stated "Windows XP". Windows XP, XP with SP1, SP2, and SP3 would be tested. Whatever was missing generally was installed by the redistributables as part of installation.

Although heinously expensive, there was a hardware virtualization program that would simulate edge cases that could be tested against using automation. Unfortunately, I do not recall the name of it but it had a fairly huge database of variables for almost any kind of GPU, CPU, and OS you could test against that would mostly meet or exceed minspec.That's how a bug in Intel's HD graphics drivers were discovered. Technically, the iGPU met the minimum requirement for the title but Intel didn't quite implement how their drivers interacted with DX to spec so it produced some pretty gnarly graphics corruption.

At any rate, the short answer is "Because, fuck you, you'll buy it anyway and we've learned from the sales data that you don't care if we put anything more than the bare minimum in to make sure it at least loads."

If you want more, demand more. If you're not getting it, vote with your wallet and patience. I'd love to play the newest Jedi game but I am certainly not going to spend $70 for it nor deal with the stuttering and low framerates that have been demonstrated. I can wait until it hits a deep discount and has those issues ironed out.

fujiJuice wrote on May 22, 2023, 23:20:
My guess is that when you are spending millions on marketing sometimes the suits just want you to hit a release date hell or high water. I can hear some CEO saying "If we push back the release people will think there are problems behind the scenes", then he probably sexually assaults someone in the room.

I am just guessing though.

I find your scenario more likely than us getting a PC port that isn't a fucking insult .

You want to release broken games because there isn't much in the way of consequence so far? Fine. Can't say that I blame you if you're only worried about financials. But don't fucking lie to me like I'm a blithering idiot.

RedEye9 wrote on May 22, 2023, 20:31:
"treat us like we are stupid"

Not without merit...
We are the one who continue to pre-order games.

Exactly. Video gamers are the sheepiest of the consumer sheep. The easiest prey. The FOMO, peer pressure, and in some sad cases outright gaming addiction, will cause video gamers to preorder games again and again and again...

If I were a publisher, I would do this the same way. Focus on a solid console launch, throw PC gamers a shitty port and (maybe) slowly fix it over the following months. The sheeple will come back and line up for preorders again once I launch the next flashy trailer. LOL.
There is literally nothing to lose. Look at EA and their track record... and then people trip over each other to preorder $70 Jedi Survivor. KA-FUCKING-CHING.

When Redfall came out in such a terrible state and the Xbox chief publically responded to the problems. The first thing he said would be fixed is the 60fps…. With all the troubles that game came out with on multiple platforms THAT is what he was worried about.

Companies, no matter how much you think they care, in actuality they do not care if your games are even playable. As long as you blindly buy it.

And as mentioned in the posts here too many people blindly buy it. Damned FOMO.

TLDR - Game publishers have learned why go to the expense of doing a complete job on PC titles when the release on console guarantees enough buzz to make PC buyers pony up regardless of how broken and unfinished the game may be on PC. Yea Sherlock, PCs are different from consoles and have different requirements duh, but publishers can't be arsed to fully fund the proper development of PC versions.

ZeroPike1 wrote on May 23, 2023, 05:26:
When Redfall came out in such a terrible state and the Xbox chief publically responded to the problems. The first thing he said would be fixed is the 60fps…. With all the troubles that game came out with on multiple platforms THAT is what he was worried about.

Companies, no matter how much you think they care, in actuality they do not care if your games are even playable. As long as you blindly buy it.

And as mentioned in the posts here too many people blindly buy it. Damned FOMO.

Redfall didn't launch broken - it launched unfinished and broken, same thing for Warhammer 3
And you are correct. Not buying these games for anything except +70% rebates is a bad decision always.

Rhett wrote on May 23, 2023, 00:07:
Why pay for QA when people pay to play early with bugs?

This. Gamers basically contributed to this trend in low quality game releases

Bodolza wrote on May 23, 2023, 00:19:

Kxmode wrote on May 22, 2023, 23:08:
if studios won't invest in proper in-house testing.

You're missing the point. The studios know the games are broken. As long as they still get massive pre-orders, they have no reason to ship a fully functioning game.

Not missing the point. It's obvious that they purposely ship broken games. My point is a cost-effective alternative to ensure product functionality at release, in cases where the publisher is reluctant to invest in proper in-house testing. They can opt to outsource the QA process to specialized businesses at a lower cost.