Batman: Arkham Origins Prioritizing DLC Over Patching Game-Breaking Bug

Batman: Arkham Origins Prioritizing DLC Over Patching Game-Breaking Bug

The developers of Batman: Arkham Origins have no plans for any further patch to address bugs or problems gamers are reporting in the official forums. However, they are "working hard on the upcoming story DLC." Ruh roh.

As you can imagine, that statement went over like a turd in a punch bowl, especially as it was supplemented with:

"If we do move forward with creating a new patch, it will try to address the progression blocking bugs for players, not the minor glitches that do not prevent one from continuing to play."

That's a hell of a conditional, as it acknowledges there are defects in the game that can block a gamer's progress altogether and yet they may not be addressed. It's unknown what percentage of gamers are affected by these bugs (or if one platform is more susceptible than others).

Any issues "that are not progression blockers will unfortunately no longer be addressed."

So, there you have the order of battle: 1. DLC. 2. Progression-blocking bugs -- maybe. 3. Forget it.

Re: Patch 1.06, is it even a possibility? [Batman: Arkham Origins Official Forums]


Comments

    This is another negative point about season passes. Since people are paying in advance they're trying to hold to their promise instead of giving refunds.

      I've learnt my lessons with season passes. Bought both Bioshock Infinite and Last of Us.

      The content I then received was NOT what I was after (more story!) so I'm not doing it again.

        Telltale games are the only series worth having Season Passes for, since you know what you're getting yourself into.

          totally agree Neo. Telltale for the win. Although I get sad when I buy the telltale season pass cause it means my heart is in for some serious ache i.e. Walking Dead

            And the wait time as well. I got Walking Dead from Episode 1 and it pains me to have to wait few months for each episode and when it is actually the end, it just killed me. Luckily I still have hope. Little Clementine.

          Gearbox as well. Borderlands has proven itself to be worthy of a season pass with the *copious* amount of plentiful DLC it releases constantly.

            I was going to say that, but when I looked back I kinda disagreed. The DLC for the first Borderlands was great because they added some variety to the game that was really needed.

            The second Borderlands on the other hand, I thought the game itself contained enough variety that DLC wasn't really that needed. While I did get the Season Pass I have only gotten through half of the first DLC and haven't touched anything else, despite downloading them.

              You should give em a try. Get some friends together and they're a great crack :D

                I mostly got my fill from the original game.

                and I don't know anybody that owns the game.

                Borderlands' Season Pass ... are you on crack? That thing was an abomination ... "Oh, here buy this - we'll give you all the future DLC" ... "Ah, actually .. there's pleanty of DLC you still got to buy". Gearbox can die in a small windowless building for such a travesty.

                  It never claimed that. It said the first 5 major pieces of DLC. Plus you ended up saving 33% on the price overall. In comparison to most season passes out there, Gearbox is one of the few that presents actual value for money. But you know, if you're gonna go all Channel 7 sensationalist on us...

                  Last edited 10/02/14 11:02 pm

                  I have to admit, the DLC sh!tstorm soured me toward the game seriously.
                  and I preordered.

                  I know, I know "5 first major pieces of DLC" but I guess I didn't read that, just expecting it would be the same as every other Season Pass.
                  I would have been happy if all DLC except weapon or skin mods were included.

                  They never said you would get ALL THE DLC. I've never once seen a season pass that ever claimed something like that. Every season pass comes with specific information about what it includes. If you choose to ignore that information and create your own expectations about what you're buying, that is not their fault.

    A good amount of the blame would be on WB Interactive as the publisher, they'd be holding the purse strings on any additional work.

    It's worth pointing out that this may not be entirely at the developer's discretion, or indeed at all. The publishers are the ones who foot the bill for outlay of patches (ie have to pay Steam, Sony, Microsoft etc), which means they often give developers a limit on the number they can deliver. I remember Rebellion expressing a desire to patch Aliens vs Predator beyond the last version we got, but SEGA refused to support it any longer. As for DLC, while it does rankle that effort is being put into creating new content rather than fixing what has already been delivered, that too would be stipulated in the contract prior to release with the publisher. This may or may not be the case in this instance.

    Last edited 10/02/14 11:41 am

      Patches are free on all those platforms now.

        Free to submit maybe, but it costs money to employee people to actually create the patch.

        Well that's something (and a damned good thing at that). When did it happen?

      Regardless of who's to blame here, there's a deep and troubling systemic problem if game-breaking bugs are remaining unaddressed. I would have thought that any contract between developer and publisher would include, at a minimum, a requirement to patch any and all game-breaking bugs as they arise (possibly with the developer incurring some additional publishing costs if they continue to recur, as they seem to be doing here).

        You would think so, but the truth is the contracts between publisher and developer has little to no reference to the product itself and is more an outline of expected profit. The publisher makes money off sales, not customer satisfaction. And while you may think the two go hand in hand, you just have to look at the sales of a game like BF4 to see that people are still buying in to these underhanded practices and undermining most chances to improve the industry.

        The only light at the end of the tunnel is these small publishers who are popping up and ignoring industry habits of demanding up to 50% of sales profits for games. Rather than forcing the developer to rely on publisher funding, they are taking just enough so that the developer is able to fund their own projects while the publisher facilitates the other costs while still making enough to survive.
        That's the way it should be

        I'm curious at to what the implications are from a Consumer Rights perspective, at least in Australia. I mean, if they're selling a product that they know contains defects which prevent it from being completed (and surely "being able to complete the game as advertised" is something that needs to be able to occur?) - and if there's a defect like that then the consumer (here) would be entitled to a refund.

    What does 'ruh roh' mean?

      It's what Scooby Doo says when he tries to say Uh oh.

      Scooby Doo's "Uh-oh"

        Wow.

          So pop culture.
          Much obscure.

            I get the reference, and I don't mind it appearing here and there (though its relevance is rapidly declining as is the size of the audience likely to get it).

            But "ruh roh" got its own tag in the article. That's a little much, surely.

              Don't get me wrong, I'm 34, that cartoon was on all the time in my younger days, but ... it's such an obscure thing to write.

                I'm 27 and from the cartoons as a kid I got it. Plus they did like 2 or 3 movies and they've redone the cartoon several times. It isn't obscure as far as I can see.

                  Maybe it's just me but I would never have thought to marry the words ruh roh with the way Scooby Doo says it.

                  Yeah they still actively show a bunch of scooby doo cartoon movies on CN (new and old).

      It's something Scooby Doo says whenever trouble is near.

    Man, I've played through this game twice and never seen a single bug - must just be lucky I guess!

      Why downvote someone for being lucky?

        It's possible the downvoter read the comment in that tone of voice that says "I did not encounter any bugs, therefore there ARE no bugs and everyone else is a big whinger."
        I doubt that was Serif's intention though.

    So, haven't picked this up yet. Is it broken on the PS3? Should I avoid it & just wait until the next proper Arkham game is made?

      It's a good game, and as far as I can tell there aren't too many game-breaking bugs that can't be fixed by exiting and reloading the game. It's basically a minor iteration on Arkham City, with some improvements but much less polish.

      The one big game-breaker I ran into involved me going back down the elevator shaft instead of exiting the GCPD building after the cutscene where Batman runs into Gordon (you'll know it when you see it). That triggers an auto save that you can't recover from.

      There are a tonne of more minor bugs, like enemies being removed from the game logic, Batman being unable to climb up certain ledges, some areas not always loading correctly the first time, etc. It's definitely very playable, though.

      I've got it on PS3 and I haven't had too many problems. Every now and then it slows down to the point where I have to turn it off for a few hours, and there was one time when I was unable to interrogate thugs because the triangle button just wouldn't appear. That was fixed by turning it off and turning it back on (eventually. I got bored and did other things between then). I'm not sure if simply reloading would have fixed it though. Anyway, my point being I haven't had too much trouble with the PS3 version, but I've probably just been lucky.

    The only progression blocking bug I found in the PC version was the air vent you couldn't climb into but at least they patched that. I still had the occasional freeze or riddler thug who wouldn't activate but could work around those.

      Apparently some Riddler thugs don't actually appear until certain story points, or until you have finished a certain story point. Not sure if that's by design, but they do eventually appear if you keep playing through the story.

    Just finished AO this morning. I had to restart once because I accidentally went back down into the GCPD building instead of leaving via the roof after the cutscene where you run into Gordon, but there were plenty of other bugs too.

    The one that I really don't understand is the way Batman will often just start flipping out while you're gliding around. He'll just snap between rotations, flopping through the air. Gameplay wise he's still flying just fine, but it's bizarre to look at. Given that he flew just fine in the previous games, it makes no sense to me that this bug exists.

    I get why it doesn't make financial success to dedicate resources to fixing bugs in the original game, it's not like it would increase sales at this point, but it's frustrating that they obviously rushed this title out without sufficient testing.

      but it's frustrating that they obviously rushed this title out without sufficient testing.

      Please don't blame the testers.

      In all likelihood, the QA team did find these bugs, but for one reason or another (probably due to time constraints), the developers opted not to fix them. No game ships bug 100% free (none, not even one) so the producers/project managers/team leads make the call to not fix bugs they deem are not critical. Yes, there are some minor things the QA team can miss, but they would not have missed game breakers.

      If you had access to the game's bug database, I can almost guarantee you those bugs would be there, most likely with a "Won't Fix" or a "Fix later if we get time" beside them.

      Last edited 10/02/14 12:49 pm

        Not blaming the QA team. I've worked in the industry and know how these things play out. My point was simply that the game was pushed out without sufficient time being spent testing and polishing. Whether that was because the development ran over time or because there simply wasn't enough time/money allocated for the project is impossible to tell from the outside.

        I know the pain of sitting there with a changelist full of bug fixes that you're not allowed to check in because they've already pushed the title through certification.

          I know the pain from the other side, filing all of the bug reports only for them to come back as Won't Fix or Low Priority...

    What game blocking bugs are people running into with the game?

    I played it on PS3, and apart from one crash that occured after I had fast travelled, I didn't run into any game blocking bugs. Did all of the sidequests and collectables too, although didn't play through it again on the super hard mode. Once was enough.

    Last edited 10/02/14 12:28 pm

      They certainly don't always happen. The game's critical path seems OK, but there are a few ways to break it if you deviate a little during the scripted story bits of the game.

    I think it's worth mentioning that most of the highly publicised launch bugs were actually patched shortly after release, incase anyone reading thought that nothing had been done since the shaky launch. Not that that excuses current issues not being fixed.

    I guess this is the problem with pre-orders, season passes and yearly franchise releases. When you've already sold a turd there's no need to polish it.

    I pasted on buying this for $16 from GMG due to a backlog of games and only really playing BF4 at the moment. Hopefully there'll be no bugs by the time I buy/play it.
    I really enjoyed the last two.

Join the discussion!