Please support Game Informer. Print magazine subscriptions are less than $2 per issue
The Effects Of Day-One Patches
Today marked the release of Medal of Honor: Warfighter, and with it a massive day-one patch containing over 100 fixes and tweaks to the game. The patch is so substantial that media outlets were not given copies of the game to review prior to its retail release; the Metacritic score for Warfighter currently sits empty. What effects are day-one patches having on the industry? Do they affect your purchasing decisions?
I think everyone can agree that it's better to fix a game with a day-one patch than to leave it broken, but when I see a list of fixes as long as Warfighter's, it makes me question the quality of the game. Catching a last minute bug or two after the game goes gold is one thing, but clearly EA was aware that Warfighter had substantial problems prior to release, since the publisher chose not to send out review copies to media outlets. At some point, you have to ask if a project needs to be delayed in order to ensure a quality experience for all consumers – not just those with Internet access who can download a mandatory patch. That call obviously wasn't mine to make, but when I look at the list of day-one fixes, it makes me think the game was pushed out the door, and that Danger Close and EA are using Warfighter's day-one patch as a crutch to help mend a broken experience.
This is a fear that many gamers have had about day-one patches in the past. Microsoft was notably against patching games for the original Xbox for this very reason, a policy it has reversed its position on. At the time, I scoffed at Microsoft's aversion to patches, and I would still rather download a title update than be stuck with a broken version of a game. But the compiling evidence makes it hard argue that day-one patches aren't affecting the industry, and players shouldn't have to rely on a day-one patches to play their new game, even if the developers are willing to.
There's a secondary issue feeding into the problem of day-one patches, and that's superfluous betas. Betas, after all, are supposed to help identify and fix problems before the final game releases. Warfighter had an open beta, but like many console betas, it was more of a glorified demo. The beta was exclusive to the Xbox 360 (did EA think the PC and PS3 versions were perfect?), and started on October 5, ending just eight days before the game's release. Even though players did their job in identifying myriad bugs in the beta, how could EA ever hope to include fixes to those problems in the final retail build?
What are your thoughts on day-one patches? Would a laundry list of fixes for a game like Warfighter affect whether you buy the game or not? Do you think console manufacturers need to discourage the use of day-one patches? Or are they a necessary evil? Share your opinions in the comments section below.
I’d like to ask you to support Game Informer’s continued coverage of games with a subscription. For less than two dollars per issue, we mail you a full year of 10 print magazines, each with cover stories and preview features filled with exclusive details about the most exciting upcoming games. We profile and interview game creators. We look back on the rich history of gaming, and we celebrate what’s next.
Here on the website, we offer much of our content for free, including game reviews, daily news, videos, event coverage, and more – all with minimal ads.
We do so with a small editorial team, alongside contributing paid writers from around the world – over 65 individuals from 9 countries around the world, just in the last couple of years.
It’s not possible without support.
In a time when game makers and games coverage have faced hard struggles and layoffs, the future of this 30+ year magazine and community is at risk. Our new standalone magazine subscription is the number one way you can keep us alive – and we believe you’ll get a pretty fantastic gaming magazine in your mailbox every few weeks for your trouble.
Thank you.
