Do PD have a trojan horse inside sabotaging them?

[NixxxoN]

Because as an IT worker I cant figure out the problem with the bugs.
These bugs that happen here and there are the cause of some code lines that get messed up I suppose.
As far as I know, if you dont do it on purpose, the bugs should not appear for themselves, as they seem to do
So I've been thinking that perhaps some people inside PD might be sabotaging them on purpose, I dont see any other explaination.

Please someone elighten me and correct me if I'm wrong...

 

[Maldoxx]

Because as an IT worker I cant figure out the problem with the bugs.
These bugs that happen here and there are the cause of some code lines that get messed up I suppose.
As far as I know, if you dont do it on purpose, the bugs should not appear for themselves, as they seem to do
So I've been thinking that perhaps some people inside PD might be sabotaging them on purpose, I dont see any other explaination.

Please someone elighten me and correct me if I'm wrong...

It's just amateurish errors. Seems like every update is launched, the programmers forget something, there's probaly no one supervising the programmers.

 

[PaMu1337]

I guess you haven't been working on any large scale projects then. When there's hundreds of people working on a single game, things like these happen. When there's someone working on some code, it doesn't require much work to break something. If you think that bugs don't just happen, you shouldn't be in IT.

 

[WarriusZero]

I guess you haven't been working on any large scale projects then. When there's hundreds of people working on a single game, things like these happen. When there's someone working on some code, it doesn't require much work to break something. If you think that bugs don't just happen, you shouldn't be in IT.

Agreed but the last sentence was not necessary...

 

[JohnScoonsBeard]

It's incredibly easy to make a change to code by mistake and not even realise it's been done until the error surfaces. Get used to it. It happens everywhere whether it's games, websites or huge multinational business applications with huge amounts of money spent on them. Business critical projects can still fall over in a drunken heap at launch with an unintended slip of a finger even after extensive testing.

 

[NixxxoN]

I guess you haven't been working on any large scale projects then. When there's hundreds of people working on a single game, things like these happen. When there's someone working on some code, it doesn't require much work to break something. If you think that bugs don't just happen, you shouldn't be in IT.

Hah, look, Bill Gates just came to the thread.
I didnt say bugs dont happen. I said bugs should not happen when something is not supposed to be touched.
Its like, if you make a car, that has no apparent issues and then 2 years later you do the restyiling, you change the front and back lights, and not change the suspension, but some issues on the suspension appear out of nowhere.

 

[NLxAROSA]

As far as I know, if you dont do it on purpose, the bugs should not appear for themselves, as they seem to do

If you're not taking precautions in the form of automated tests, then yes, bugs will appear by themselves in different parts of the system when making a change somewhere else. Especially when code is not perfect (it never is) and/or perfectly encapsulated (it never is, especially if you have to take performance into consideration). So I agree, things like this should not happen, it's a sure sign of crappy QA/overcomplex architecture.

So PD doesn't need an excuse in the form of a 'saboteur', they're quite capable of breaking the product all by themselves.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Regardless of the cause, which we'll never know anyway, it does seem to indicate that they don't thoroughly test the updates before releasing it to the public. You'd think at least one employee would spend a few hours going through the various aspects of the game, and making sure everything is working properly. I can see where a smaller dev doing massive changes to many aspects of the game might have something slip by, but for such a minor update on such a popular game, it seems inconceivable that things like this slip by.

 

[GTPorsche]

I don't know of any game that gets updated and doesn't have bugs/issues that pop up as a result of the update.

It happens, and the devs patch them later.. unless you're the team behind NASCAR 14...

 

[photonrider]

One of the reasons (among many others) I played GT5 entirely offline without a single DLC was to also monitor as I played what was happening to the players who updated religiously.
The amount of screaming about bugs and glitches after every update was phenomenal.
Even when the money glitch appeared. Not that that wasn't good screaming.

 

[SJC ALPHA]

Regardless of the cause, which we'll never know anyway, it does seem to indicate that they don't thoroughly test the updates before releasing it to the public. You'd think at least one employee would spend a few hours going through the various aspects of the game, and making sure everything is working properly.

Especially when people here on GTPlanet find these issues within an hour or so of release.

 

[Mr Grumpy]

Especially when people here on GTPlanet find these issues within an hour or so of release.

That's exactly why they don't need to, why pay someone to do it when we all do it for free.

 

[McLaren]

Hah, look, Bill Gates just came to the thread.
I didnt say bugs dont happen. I said bugs should not happen when something is not supposed to be touched.
Its like, if you make a car, that has no apparent issues and then 2 years later you do the restyiling, you change the front and back lights, and not change the suspension, but some issues on the suspension appear out of nowhere.

Pretty sure this happens in every game, whether by the devs or modding communities. Rockstar's Heist update was centered around the Online game & that only, yet whatever they released has caused numerous bugs within' the Single Player game, issues that have no relation to Heists & what not.

Just the nature of the beast.

 

[Skygrasper550]

Being a computer programmer myself, I agree with @PaMu1337 . Whenever programmers work on a huge project like this, bugs are bound to happen in unexpected places, no matter how careful they are with the programming. Because the more complex a program is, the more prone it is to bugs and glitches. It's just fact.

EDIT -- there's just one thing that the original post gets to me... this bit...

Because as an IT worker I cant figure out the problem with the bugs.
These bugs that happen here and there are the cause of some code lines that get messed up I suppose.
As far as I know, if you dont do it on purpose, the bugs should not appear for themselves, as they seem to do

EXACTLY. Bugs are unexpected occurrences in programs. I mean, how can an unexpected occurrence be done "on purpose"? If it's done on purpose, it's not a bug anymore.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Yes.. totally PD are sabotaged.

 

[t_wilson01]

PD doesn't need an excuse in the form of a 'saboteur', they're quite capable of breaking the product all by themselves.

That was beautiful...

Thinking back to GT3, it was very well coded. No glaring graphical issues, no game breaking bugs, small amount of cars and tracks, but they were all a sight to see.

I think that the code for GT5/GT6 is so convoluted that nothing short of scrapping it and starting over would fix all the issues they have. PD just tried to do too much.

 

[Skygrasper550]

That was beautiful...

Thinking back to GT3, it was very well coded. No glaring graphical issues, no game breaking bugs, small amount of cars and tracks, but they were all a sight to see.

I think that the code for GT5/GT6 is so convoluted that nothing short of scrapping it and starting over would fix all the issues they have. PD just tried to do too much.

No, they got lazy.

Because video games nowadays can be made to receive updates online via internet connection, this makes developers lazy in fine-tuning the game. They tend to focus much, much more on including content that they tend to neglect how said content would be like in-game. I always get the sense that "Ehhh we can always dish out a fix after the game's release so why bother with fine-tuning and testing the game anyway. If there are bugs, the community will point it out to us". Sounds familiar?

Spoiler

Assassin's Creed: Unity

 

[eran0004]

These bugs that happen here and there are the cause of some code lines that get messed up I suppose.
As far as I know, if you dont do it on purpose, the bugs should not appear for themselves, as they seem to do

Code lines are not independent, they interact with each other. You can get an new bug for an old feature by writing a new code that forgets to take a piece of old code into account.

No, they got lazy.

No, games got complex.

 

[t_wilson01]

No, they got lazy.

Because video games nowadays can be made to receive updates online via internet connection, this makes developers lazy in fine-tuning the game. They tend to focus much, much more on including content that they tend to neglect how said content would be like in-game. I always get the sense that "Ehhh we can always dish out a fix after the game's release so why bother with fine-tuning and testing the game anyway. If there are bugs, the community will point it out to us". Sounds familiar?

Spoiler

Assassin's Creed: Unity

While I would agree that the age of internet connected, hard drive equipped consoles has allowed some publishers to knowingly release unfinished games to be patched later, I would also say that the phrase "lazy devs" is thrown around far too easily.

It's crazy to think that in the early 90's a 16Mb game was considered a big deal, yet now a days that's barely enough space for one texture map. I can very well criticize GT6 for all it's deficiencies, but I also appreciate all the things it does well, specially considering the nightmarish hardware it's running on.

 

[R5]

Just gonna leave this here.

 

[VBR]

It's true that big complex projects unexpectedly result in bugs. However, the problem is that PD doesn't seem to be concerned about fixing them all, just the odd one here & there.

 

[Islaygaz]

A friend of mine is something in writing code for something (I did pay attention when he told me honest!). Anyway one thing I remember him saying is that everyone codes in their own style so maybe it's just an honest error if/when someone else writes some code that somebody has already written.

 

[Skygrasper550]

A friend of mine is something in writing code for something (I did pay attention when he told me honest!). Anyway one thing I remember him saying is that everyone codes in their own style so maybe it's just an honest error if/when someone else writes some code that somebody has already written.

That is one of the main reasons for bugs to happen in a program. It's true, each programmer writes code in their own style. And if one person is to continue or add to the work of another person, that 1st person is likely to misinterpret or fail to understand what the 2nd person's code is actually doing. That right there is a perfect situation wherein a program bug could and would happen.

 

[eran0004]

A friend of mine is something in writing code for something (I did pay attention when he told me honest!). Anyway one thing I remember him saying is that everyone codes in their own style so maybe it's just an honest error if/when someone else writes some code that somebody has already written.

It's enough to simply not think about all the possible scenarios. You can write a code that works perfectly fine in 99 cases but then there's one case that you didn't think about when you wrote the code and when that case occurs the code will produce an unexpected result.

 

[Grayfox]

Also I dont think PD do much internal testing.

 

[Bo]

Its like, if you make a car, that has no apparent issues and then 2 years later you do the restyiling, you change the front and back lights, and not change the suspension, but some issues on the suspension appear out of nowhere.

That's a terrible analogy. You speak as though coding for everything is remote, unrelated to anything else. When you change one thing, other things can change too - that is how bugs occur. For your analogy to make sense, everything in the car would have to be physically linked - so if you made one mechanical alteration, other mechanical items would also shift slightly - if they weren't exactly a shape that allowed for the part to function correctly once moved, you would then have "a bug".

 

[poumpoum]

Bugs happen, specially with big projects like this one.

Everything is linked. For example a team works on the way the gamer data are saved. But the way the gearbox data is saved is a little different from "regular" data => BUG

For me, the real question is : Why do they keep modifying the core of GT6 ? Instead of just putting new content (cars, tracks and events) ? Does it means that they're using the same core for GT7 ? and that's why we have this kind of bugs ?

And like @VBR said : PD doesn't seem concerned about fixing them all... The power steering otpion has stopped working since the 1.12 update for T500RS and they just don't care...

 

[Allek]

1200 cars x 86 track layouts x 40 tune options for each car (approx.) = 4,128,000 combinations. To test each for only 5 minutes would take 39,2 YEARS to discover that whenever you restart the game your Subaru BRZ loses its tune for Cape Ring Reverse.

If PD had ALL its 200 employees, including Kaz and translator-san, looking for bugs in an update it would take 2 months and 11 days doing exclusively this, and thus halting anything else.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Bugs happen, this we know. A thorough amount of testing involving everything a typical gamer does should also occur with multiple cars to make sure that there are no obvious bugs in the system. That doesn't mean stopping at every corner of the Nurb and seeing if every tree looks as designed, but it should mean going through the motions of purchasing cars, tuning, changing tunes, adding and deleting parts, running races, pit stops etc. etc. etc.

1200 cars x 86 track layouts x 40 tune options for each car (approx.) = 4,128,000 combinations. To test each for only 5 minutes would take 39,2 YEARS to discover that whenever you restart the game your Subaru BRZ loses its tune for Cape Ring Reverse.

If PD had ALL its 200 employees, including Kaz and translator-san, looking for bugs in an update it would take 2 months and 11 days doing exclusively this, and thus halting anything else.

This is a gross exaggeration. You don't need to test every car and track because specific car and/or track bugs are not game breaking. It's the ordinary things we all do all the time that need testing as I listed above.

 

[eran0004]

For me, the real question is : Why do they keep modifying the core of GT6 ? Instead of just putting new content (cars, tracks and events) ? Does it means that they're using the same core for GT7 ? and that's why we have this kind of bugs ?

As for the transmission bug, the reason they had to dig around in that is probably because the Alpine VGT has rather extreme gear ratios.