[Joe Forster/STA]

(Wrong forum, moved.)

To correct the original poster, copy protections are NOT developed by game publishers/developers but by separate companies. Therefore, the time it takes to (further) develop a copy protection does not reduce the development time of the actual game. But, replacing the word "time" with the word "money"... oh, yes, now that is true! As for testing any kind of software - not necessarily a game -, yes, a lot of different hardware and software configuration needs to be used: this is what official testers are for. (See Micro$oft: they started publishing the betas of their OS's for free, for anyone to download and use it for free but, also, test it for free!)

Also, if there are no bugs to be fixed in a game, there will be new features instead, as requested by users, which again boils down to official updates. Today's games are much more sophisticated - in design, programming and game experience - and the deadlines are also stricter than in the old days of microcomputers where, of course, there was no possibility to update the games as 1) they came on floppy disks and there were no hard disks (read: where do you put the updated version of the game?) and 2) there was no Internet (for common people) (read: how do you get the update package?) either.

What needs to be improved, though, is the attitude of game publishers towards bugs/problems found in their games; I wouldn't touch the official support of any game company with a stick anyway because the result would be 1) long delays in replies, 2) improper answers or replies that do not answer the specific question (only give general ideas) or 3) a sad reply that says they cannot help me because of whatever reason (read: the retail versions of games have no proper embedded debug facilities that would output something that lets the developers find the exact reason in no time).