top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 9 points 3 years ago (6 children)
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    Why is it square? Wasn't there always the X in this picture?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago

    Do they have any idea how little that narrows it down?

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    I'll believe it when I see it. I'm not preordering anything anymore.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (4 children)

    Yeah how can they say it has the "fewest bugs any Bethesda game has shipped with" when the game hasn't shipped yet??

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children)

    Yeah how can they say it has the “fewest bugs any Bethesda game has shipped with” when the game hasn’t shipped yet??

    Issue tracking has been a part of software development since the beginning. They know and have always known roughly how many bugs they have shipped games with. Just like any company that releases a product knows roughly how many bugs they are shipping with. I pretty much guarantee you that any software that has ever been released has had a huge backlog of bugs of varying levels of importance sitting on some form of backlog.

    So, it's pretty straightforward for them to know how this game is comparing against their previous releases. Not to say that there won't be plenty of bugs that have been missed, but that's not really the point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Most bugs don't show themselves right away, once it releases the combined play hours of all the internal testing will be surpassed within the first day. That's why there were 3 (so far) duplication glitches found in TOTK immediately when Nintendo had been looking for that sort of thing all throughout the development of the game.
    Let's say 500,000 people download it on launch day and start playing it immediately and each play for an average of 6 hours, that's 3,000,000 hours of combined playtime.
    Unless they have an enormous beta community they haven't got anywhere near that amount of testing in on the game.
    I'm not saying there's not going to be less bugs than previous games, I do believe them on that because it being a flagship game from Xbox game studios they're going to put a lot of pressure on the team to get it right, but don't take that to mean there's no bugs at all and especially no game-breaking ones.
    Keep your expectations tempered and please don't pre-order games.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    I appreciate all the informed takes people have in this thread.

    Good QA/testing teams can make or break your product, but there's only so many things they can cover in such a massive project

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    I’m not saying there’s not going to be less bugs than previous games, I do believe them on that because it being a flagship game from Xbox game studios they’re going to put a lot of pressure on the team to get it right, but don’t take that to mean there’s no bugs at all and especially no game-breaking ones.

    Isn't this almost exactly what Phil Spencer says from those quotes in the article?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago
    [–] 4 points 3 years ago
    [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    That’s one of the least reassuring statements I’ve ever seen a company make about their own product. They’re basically saying “it sucks less than the other stuff we’ve crapped out!”

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    Oh really? The famous and trustworthy reviewer of games 'Microsoft' is saying this? Are they competing with IGN next?

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    But did you see the sheer number of bugs on launch in previous Bethesda games? This is like saying "lighters are the least dangerous fire yet." Shit's still gonna burn your house down, yo.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    That from a company that actually shipped Windows ME.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

    Sounds like an Onion headline.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    Sooo slightly less crammed with them?

    I mean i get it. They make super open world games that are very free form. Its got to be near impossible to make a bug free experience. As long as they still allow missing, they can get away with a lot.

    But fallout 76 was a mistake. It will be a long week before i forget that.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Let's not trip over these bars we're setting here.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    I consider Bethesda to be among my favorite game devs and even I know that this is cap 🧢🧢🧢🧢🧢🧢🧢🧢

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    Okay so it has one less bug than the others... so still a massive amount of bugs

  • source
  • Knowing Bethesda that doesn't say much.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    Is it just me or does ist sound like Trump?

    "Nobody knows games better than me, believe me. Starfield, my incredible creation, will have fewer bugs than any game in history. I guarantee it, folks!"

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    …and they said Vista was better than XP.. Win 8 was better than 7.. Win 11 is better than Win 10. I’m not sure Microsoft is the best at compare/contrast.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    Microsoft also says their OS is good

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago
    [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    OK, on one side, 9999 is less than 10000 and it doesn't make it any better. On another side, Microsoft is literally the one selling you the game. What the hell are they going to say? "Oh yeah, BTW, this is an unusable bug ridden fest! Hahaha! Bethesda right?"

    Next on the news, ExxonMobil says CO2 emissions are not that bad... Jfc

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    Fewer than infinity is still infinity. That being said, the Starfield deep dive from the other day made the game look amazing. I hope it's good.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    So we are still going to have a way above average number of bugs, just not the typical Bethesda amount 🤷.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    I don't know that I'd brag about that. :)

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    I'd say my thoughts on that quote is:

    Weird flex, but okay

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    Would Microsoft say...it just works? :D

  • source
  • [+] 1 point 3 years ago
    [–] 0 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    I'm not great at high-level maths like that, but can infinities be sized different in a way that makes a comparison of quantity valid?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children)

    Yes! There's actually two facets to consider:

    1. Infinities can be countable or uncountable:

      • The set of integers is a countable infinity. This is pretty obvious, since you can easily count from one member to the next.

      • The set of irrational numbers is an uncountable infinity. This is because if I give you one member, you can't give me an objectively "next" one. There's infinitely many choices.

        Example: I say what's the next member of the set of irrational numbers after 1.05? Well, there's 1.050001, 1.056, etc.

    2. Can a member of an infinite set be mapped to a corresponding member of another infinite set? And if so, how?

      Spoiler, there are three different ways: surjective, injective, and bijective.

    In this situation, the sets are both countable. QA can open bug #1, bug #2, etc. It's also - for now - at least a surjective mapping of Starfield bugs -> Skyrim bugs. Because they're both countable, for each bug in Starfield you can find at least one bug in Skyrim (because it's a known bigger set at the moment).

    But we don't know more than that right now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    This is pretty obvious, since you can easily count from one member to the next.

    I'd just like to chip in that it isn't necessary for a countably infinite set to have an obvious method of counting. Listing all of the rationals in numerical order isn't possible (what's the smallest fraction above 0?) but it is nevertheless possible to create a bijection with the naturals.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›