
Let's be real, the release cadence for Crimson Desert patches has been insane.
In all of our years writing about video games, we've basically never seen such meaningful updates drop so quickly. Since its launch on the 29th March, Crimson Desert has pretty much received one big patch every week or so — and there are no signs of this schedule slowing down anytime soon.
Again, these aren't your usual bug-squashing hotfixes — these have been meaty, full-on title updates that make significant changes to the experience, and even provide brand new content.
Subscribe to Push Square on YouTube169k
So many of these improvements have been driven by player feedback, too — so you've got to consider just how effectively developer Pearl Abyss has been able to not only identify key issues, but address them within the space of just 15 days.
We don't know how much of the studio's actually working on all of this post-launch support, but the effort, and the subsequently rapid turnaround, surely must be applauded.
But there's a difference between praise, and weaponising Pearl Abyss in an attempt to dunk on other developers.

Across social media and in our own comments sections, we've seen a growing sentiment that the Korean company is putting its peers to shame. And honestly, it can be difficult to argue against such a claim.
Case in point: Starfield launched just last week on PS5, and it's becoming abundantly clear that the game's got a fundamental stability issue that can cause frequent crashes. The fix is supposed to be coming this week, but it's damning that the sci-fi title shipped in such a state to begin with.
Now obviously, Starfield is an extreme example; not every new release hits PS5 in a barely functional form.
But from our perspective, the groundswell of public positivity for Pearl Abyss is rooted in two key factors: the speed at which Crimson Desert is receiving updates — as mentioned — and the developer's ongoing communication with players.
In a world where so many studios and publishers give fans the silent treatment until they're absolutely sure that their next update is ready to roll, Pearl Abyss' commitment to laying out expectations is a breath of fresh air.
There is another side to this, though, and it really should be considered when looking at Crimson Desert from an objective standpoint. Indeed, this is a game that was, and still is, full of things that could, and should, be improved upon.

Technical performance, quality of life, gameplay balance, accessibility options, controller layouts — we could sit here all day and list ways in which the title could be bettered.
And this leads to the suggestion that Crimson Desert simply released in an unfinished state, and perhaps the idea that Pearl Abyss had the majority of these updates locked and loaded well ahead of time.
Tinged with conspiracy though it may be, it's not utterly unrealistic to think that the developer had a lot of this stuff banked for the sake of positive post-launch publicity.
Crimson Desert didn't release broken or anything like that, but it did drop with plenty of scope for improvement — the kind of improvement that, you'd imagine, would have been picked up on during development.
And so we're here to ask: what are your thoughts on Crimson Desert's patch policy up until this point? Just how much praise does Pearl Abyss deserve? Vote in our polls, and then update your opinion in the comments section below.





Comments 74
Just to note, we plan on re-reviewing Crimson Desert fairly soon. It's actually mad how much the game has been improved in such a short space of time.
We'll see what the next couple of major updates bring and work from there.
The game is definitely unfinished. Too many updates is not a good look. They sure care about fixing the game, but why did they put themselves in this place when they could have just released it in a better state?
Playing the hell out of it. 85+hrs in and have only done about half of the main story quests.
Love it.
If you're a fan of Dragons Dogma you owe it to yourself to check this one out.
The game wasn’t unfinished at launch. It was perfectly playable and I had very little bugs. What they are doing now is listening to the community and changing things around player feedback.
If they delayed the game it would have still released in a similar state to what was actually released at launch.
Listening to player feedback is what is making this game better and I’m all for it.
Absolutely unfinished. These are the kind of patches that make it seem like the game wasn't beta tested at all. I'm glad Pearl Abyss is so responsive to feedback, but the don't deserve credit for releasing an incomplete game for money just to fix it after it made them money.
Bethesda needs to take notes.
Other devs ship a game and all their staff then seem to have left for a holiday! Pearl Abyss launched Crimson Desert and seemingly have a full roster working on meaty patches with game improvements.
Compare with the recent launch of Starfield, there are widespread reports of crashes, Bethesda knows the cause, but it still hasn’t fixed it.
What Pearl Abyss is doing right is treating post-launch support as important to support people who’ve already paid, post launch isn’t just an afterthought!
I have a friend that is playing since release, he told me that the game had its bugs but it was complete at lunch. Maybe questionable choices like controls, but not really an early access like a vocal minority is trying to push.
I think I will get it this weekend, steam reviews are picturing a game I will for sure like and with every patch it is getting better and better.
I would say that most publishers deploy games that are "ready enough". A trend I would like to see go away. However, this game doesn't seem so incomplete that they need an extra month before reviewers can review the game (cough cough Marathon)
Having been one of the poor sods that bought Cyberpunk 2077 at launch, and got to BG3 Act 3 before their patches did, I'm not sure I'd call this game unfinished. But it wasn't exactly primed and ready to go too.
It's very playable on a base PS5, it's very fun, but there's some real annoying issues (like fiddly controls) that hold it back.
I doubt they intended to release it in a worse state, people have held off buying it because of its issues, but I also think praising a company releasing a game a bit too soon before it's fully ready should be commended. But I'm glad to see updates rolling out, and I'm looking forward to jumping back in
Clearly the game was finished at launch. The reviews came out, the bugs weren't the problem. It was just a love it or hate type game.
So reality is, they are going above and beyond.
I mean look at the state of minds eye or even cyberpunk, or even bethesda games.
This company are putting all of them to shame.
A crazy big world, many mechanics and it ran even at launch with very little bugs.
Even Cyberpunk, it maybe, beloved by many but reality is the world is pretty bog standard in terms of NPCs and what you can actually interact with.
This game really does feel like its lived in.
They are doing an absolute fabulous job of truly finishing their vision unlike many
My thoughts echo the majority of the votes as they stand.
I recently finished my playthrough at a little over 90 hours. I started playing a few minutes after launch.
I never felt the game was unfinished or unplayable. It was certainly....imperfect but, for me, it was a good game from the start.
What has been added in addition to minor bug fixes is lots of QoL improvements. Many of those make the game better or more enjoyable but, IMO, they weren't essential.
For me, this is case of the developer providing excellent support.
I want to play, but at this point it sounds like I'd be crazy to get it now. Seems like a no-brainer to wait until the patches fall off and the game goes on sale.
I mean, this game looks pretty cool. It does, but how can anyone argue the facts? The post launch updates tell a tale.
The thing that bothers me more than anything is that once you point out the problems, someone sees it as an attack and tries to tell you why you are just being difficult. Two things can be true, the game can be janky and even unfinished and still be good/cool.
Why are there so many who jump at the slightest criticism?
It was finished. All the patches is improvement from feedback. We live in an era where that's possible, thankfully.
People who praises the old days because we got complete games are wrong. Games were full of bugs/glitches, but you couldn't see it as easily as today and if a game was bad and players hated something, it could never be improved like it was today or made better. You were stuck with garbage.
@Hyena_socks I agree with you completely. In fact, BG3 was actually unplayable for me at launch on PS5, even on Act 1. Granted, I played Cyberpunk on Stadia, so I don’t know how bad PS4/5 was, but I can imagine, based on the Stadia version! This game isn’t incomplete. It just needed more time and the studio said, “Nope.” Maybe they ran out of budget and needed the sales to fund the updates?
I wouldn't say unfinished, many of its core systems were (many still are) poorly implemented. It's good to see them being responsive to the community but they're only able to make such differences because of their own poor design choices.
Having played at launch and with the improvements, I'd probably still just give it the same score today, somewhere between a 7 and an 8. As whilst they are nice improvements, none of them are game changing, its story and characters are still rubbish and many quests are downright boring, it's menu's are still convoluted. But on the flip side, the world is vast, there's plenty to do, it's engaging to explore and combat can be really fun
Yet another attempt to throw shade from Push..how many of these articles can you post?
Delighted at the QOL improvements added to the game, and the Devs actually listening. I've played since release and the game has never felt broken just unbelievably full of systems and therefore complexity. Fortunately I've been playing all the camp missions, which are full of tutorial missions for the huge number of systems and things you can do in the game, many of which I might never have discovered.
Lots of respect for Black pearl, I like the way they made their game and now I like the way they support it.
Maybe they were running out of money and had to release it to get some income to keep working on it? And because it sold well on release they can now do all the things they didnt have a budjet for if they postponed the release? Either way, I'll buy the ultimate edition on next gen, maybe.
There needs to be a “both” option for the poll. Yes, it was not quite ready for launch and should have been held back a little longer. Yes, it’s good that the devs are doggedly working on it.
People hold this game to different standards. Plenty of games before it that launched with continuous updates with much worse gameplay and I’m not even talking about cyberpunk. Even starfield which was rated higher by journalists at launch. Despite that game not even being optimized. Give this dev a break! They launched at current generation RPG which to me feels next generation just like when the Witcher 3 came out.
The devs are being humble and listening to community feedback to make the game better. As internally what they had before they thought was fine. And their paying customers whom are their base didn’t like some gameplay elements.
It's nice to be excited for a new game, to want it day one, but, I'm comfortably in the camp of those who don't mind waiting for large complex games to get patched up, especially seeing as patch work post release has become a common approach.
I don't need to moan. I can just wait several months, get on with life, and dive in when it's fully patched and improved upon. Simple really.
@Enuo what’s incomplete about it? The game runs at launch better than previous ambitious RPGs at launch. Quality of life improvements listening to real community feedback of paying customers doesn’t mean a game is incomplete. Artists oftentimes have a vision and go with it. We are lucky this dev is humble enough to receive feedback. As recently we have seen many developers especially in the west be nasty if fans don’t like something.
The Witcher 3, cyberpunk 2077 did the exact same thing. Why is this different?
Going to wait on it - hopefully they'll add the character creator at some point given that someone has released a PC mod that already does it!
Devs should not be put on a pedestal for releasing an unfinished broken game.
What sort of message does that send out.
No wonder the industry is in the gutter
I feel like it's both. It clearly is a finished game given how many people are actually playing it, lol. But it does need love. And it's getting it. So if that bothers you, wait for it to be "finished" — whatever that means to you. I think a lot of people who are angry really want to join everyone else but because of some self imposed moral stance about waiting until it's all buttoned up, they really are just jealous they aren't playing it right now.
This game was fine at release. Much of the patches were the result of the devs listening to the qol recommendations of the community and implementing them.
Above and beyond is an understatement.
Bethesda broke their own game (vats system), with a patch to one of their fallout re release cash grabs... It took them 18 months to fix it. Capcom still hasn't addressed issues in monster hunter and dragons Dogma 2. The list goes on.
The modern day bar is low and there are a myriad of games that release technically terrible and take months and months to even attempt to address from huge devs, yet it gets completely glossed over and a non factor in reviews....
Crimson Desert released with some design shortcomings that only took a few days of those being made widely aware for them to address them, over and over again. With a half a dozen patches and hot fixes in just a matter of weeks. To call this unfinished or broken is absurd, and proves the online bandwagon has dramatic influence over you. Not to mention the fact you voted that without even playing it...
This game was slandered because it breaks norms in its genre and the machine hates that much like expedition 33 and bg3. Sadly many will pass on this gem because of that online campaign. Alongside reviewers in the mainstream who didn't have the time to engage most of the game because of priority conflicts.
It's hands down one of the best open world sandboxes I've experienced in over 20 years of gaming.
Beta tester is supposed to be a payed job. But now you have to pay to be a beta tester.
@DartLOD and they were dunked on for it. Deservingly so.
@Enuo you clearly don't know what the word unfinished or absolutely mean, lol.
Sounds like a bunch of things that could have been cleaned up during the QA process and play testing before release. They sold enough copies pre-launch, so I guess it didn't hurt their product releasing it in the state it was in.
It's unfinished. Sub-30fps on performance mode on PS5 Pro at crunch points, tearing on all versions with VSync on. Adding QoL features within days of release all show they were coming in very hot.
In a perfect world it should have been delayed a few months but I understand why it wasn't, the marketing budget on this seemed massive, I've seen it everywhere and they can't change that at the 11th hour.
So considering they were locked in I respect the speed of the devs reacting. That said we also need QUALITY of patches not just speed. E.g. Adding a 4K toggle after people complained about image quality on base consoles is NOT the right approach if it reduces framerates by 10fps and it now never hits the target, they have to actually OPTIMISE the game and make concessions to make it run at target framerates without looking like vaseline is smeared on the screen, that takes time.
I'm looking forward to playing it, but not like this. I'll wait till it's ready.
“Now obviously, Starfield is an extreme example; not every new release hits PS5 in a barely functional form.”
This is scathing, 100% accurate, and I’m grateful no punches were pulled.
While I can see the unfinished game argument, in most instances it take MONTHS or longer to improve. PA have shown that feedback can and should be implemented quickly. Puts Ubisoft Capcom(MH Wilds) and CD Project Red to shame for how long they took.
Its worth noting a lot of the updates have just been fixings and adding QoL features that should have been there from the start. Its great they're acting so fast but this narrative of them putting western devs to shame falls apart when you remember most of the post release support is stuff already in day 1 releases of most "western" games. Like "hide helmet" is a bog standard feature that somehow took weeks to be added.
Its a great game i love it easily a GOTY contender for me and its great the devs listen to feedback and act on it fast but let's not glaze them for simply "finishing" the game post release even if a lot of it is based around player feedback.
@themightyant There's no tearing with V-Sync on provided you don't have it on with VRR as well. I've had zero tearing and trust i would notice it as i hate it to the point it hurts my eyes. Performance is caused by CPU issues there's nothing the devs can do about that, you can't do a battle as large and dynamic as the Chapter 6 battle and expect 60fps on CPU's this weak. GTA VI will no doubt have the same issues.
Played the hell out of it and Starfield since both launches - both truly excellent games, I’m having an absolute blast on the Pro and these two will sort me out for months to come!
@KundaliniRising333 E33 and BG3 were hated by the mainstream? What since when?
It's not really uncommon for a game to release fixes and gameplay enhancements/QoL stuff post-release, it's just the rate at which they're doing it is unseen in the modern gaming space.
@DennisReynolds they were slandered in the sense that they were cited as anaomlies and warned zombies to not expect such scope and quality as a new norm for their genres.
Re-review? Isn't that against the law 😄. Dunno if it's a good or bad thing. If other sites follow, games are going to be released unfinished and ask for re-reviews.
@Dalamar cdprojektred is wildly regarded as one of the best developers in the world. Them getting “dunked” on seems to be a smart business strategy then.
@ShogunRok Would appreciate you at least acknowledging that PS got the review horribly wrong, it really wasn't that bad when it was released, at worst a bit clunky. This is even more so after the questionable grace that Marathon and Starfield were given post-release.
@DennisReynolds Yes that one is a CPU issue, but it should be coded more efficiently to at least stay over VRR window. But it's not just massive battles like that, it's the opening scenes walking over a bridge with few npc's too.
I'm not expecting a locked 60fps when things get busy, but i've seen enough evidence from credible sources (Digital Foundry, NX gamer, El Analista Bits etc.) to show performance isn't what it could be. They can do better, I believe they will improve it, I will wait.
VSync should work in tandem with VRR, not one OR the other. ESPECIALLY if you game is struggling to hit a stable framerate most of the time, VRR is essential for me.
I don’t think the two are mutually exclusive of one another.
@DennisReynolds These so-called 'bog-standard' features like hide helmet/shield, that were included soon after release, never had any significant impact on the game's playability or can be claimed to render the game 'unfinished', the framing that is being used to rationalise the silly review.
@KundaliniRising333 Both games had the highest MC scores of their years, got universal acclaim and won endless GOTY awards. I love CD but E33 and BG3 it is not. CD is a jack of all trades game but master of nothing, i love it for that but let's not pretend its taking open world gaming to new levels because it hasn't.
@Silenos The point is many of the things they have been adding is stuff that should have been there from the start. Didn't even have a storage chest on release.
@itsfoz Exactly. The game can be unfinished AND the devs have gone above and beyond post release putting SOME other studios to shame. Both can be true, and are.
But it would have been better to have launched in a more performant state and feature complete. Adding things that almost every review complained about post release should have been done during QA and testing.
I found the controls atrocious and unintuitive, which was enough to deter me from further playing the game, I’ll wait before I play this game again.
@DennisReynolds i like how you're being honest about the game, after so many hours with it I reckon. This is why I normally regard reviews because a verdict is giving after the game's completion or several hours after, not those extra excited 5hr playtime brand new game spur of the moment 10/10 User review scores. We'll see how people actually feel about this game months later.
Unfinished and should have been delayed. I will die on that hill
Game was a big beautiful mess at launch and the developers have been cleaning up that mess at an impressive rate. This is commendable. The more relevant issues for me are design related, which are a different kettle of fish.
@DartLOD I can only speak for myself, but I don't regard them as even good developers.
Honestly this game doesnt need a story, it feels like more of a slice of life where events just move forward at a steady pace.
@SoulofBashar Maybe a delay' wasn't an Option for them at the time. Sometimes you need to release "as is" just to get some "return income" flowing back in and sort' it later. Good on them for the frequent updates.
I encountered the map crashing the game bug early on, tried to persevere without opening map until I would forget. Now I'm just waiting for them to iron out all the kinks. I do find it strange how many QoL issues weren't picked up in its development but do feel they are getting overly praised for fixing what shouldn't have been broken on release
@SoulofBashar Most of the Updates are QoL which only comes from user feedback.
@Dalamar You’re correct in that we are only speaking for ourselves. Unfortunately, for you, you’re in the tiniest of minorities in this one.
I bounced off Crimson Desert quite hard and my issue isn't one they can patch easily.
The game narrative focus is utter nonsense which means I end up doing stuff just because it's there to do not because I have any real purpose beyond that.
In games like Kingdom Come Deliverance (both of them) and other games of similar scope I know why I am doing the things I do. I don't have that at all in Crimson Desert.
I know a lot of this is a me issue but it's not totally. I mean even the devs and voice actors are on record saying the narrative is rushed and often makes no sense.
To release big patches they way they have so quickly tells me they knew what was wrong when the game shipped, had the fixes ready to go and waited for gamer feedback to decide which patches to release and when.
I used to preorder often, now when I just think people are paying a premium to be glorified beta testers.
Currently I only feel like trusting Capcom and Sony first party to give day one games that are not a buggy mess.
I said before release, over and over, that the game would have issues at launch. It is a giant, systems-driven, open world. Like...ya' been paying attention, folks?
@KundaliniRising333 Well said, this is by far the best, most rational well-articulated comment here amongst all so much false equivalence if not outright bias.
Yes, it released in an unfinished state. You see, the whole game was not on the disc. I’d call that unfinished.
@Dalamar do you buy Atlus games at launch? No shade, just wondering if you draw a distinction.
54% of the people haven't played it yet the amount of votes for how much Pearl Abyss has done I'd almost the same. Social media "gamers" strike again.
The game launched unfinished. The features they want to add by June should have been on day 1. They should have delayed until June.
Core features like difficulty setting and a more thought-out progression system for the other 2 characters missing are a clear indication of that.
The game was functional at launch, but is that really an acceptable barometer for a near full-price AAA game?
It's good they are getting these big patches out quickly, but they wouldn't have needed to do them if the game were "finished".
It was a fully functional game when it released. It wasn't broken. It wasn't unfinished.
It's just better now.
Are we actually applauding a company that release an unfinished game and now is trying to fix it 😒 this guy's should be ashamed too
i put 50 hours in and made it to chapter 7 in crimson desert, game is unfinished. it’s early access unfinished, cyberpunk was a buggy mess but 99% of the game was in place. crimson desert feels like i payed to be a tester for a game that’s going to release in 6 months.
I think it's both. A part is/was unfinished amd then there are additional quality of life updates baked in. I'm glad I held of and am waiting for a sale.
@TheArt Don't get me wrong i love the game and i can easily see it being my GOTY but yeah i'm not blind to its many many faults. I love how fast the devs work and i love they are listening to feedback and acting on it but at the same time its hard to glaze them for giving us features that really should have been there from the start. Like people love to s**t on Bethesda and yes they deserve it most of the time but most of the stuff CD has added in updates that people are praising the devs for was in Skyrim on day 1 on PS3 🤷♂️
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...