There is no real problem with the act of patching games per se. There is a problem with game developers not being able to make good patches. When you look at the change lists you get the feeling that they were working from a list of “change requests”, and they just went through the list and “fixed” every problem without considering how each change affects the game as a whole.
Still, I don’t see this practice changing any time soon. Patching games is a good value for developers because it pleases the highest number of stakeholders:
-
The developer is happy because of the additional money coming in either by reselling the game in patched form or just by reaping the rewards of renewed interest in the game by giving away the patch.
-
Casual fans (who are the most numerous) are happy because patching games gives the perception that the developers care about making the game fun, or at least care about removing the parts of the game that make it “unfun”.
-
The high-level competitors (who are the most visible) might not be all that happy, but they are able to adapt quickly because they usually rely on solid fundamentals to win and can leverage those to keep themselves at the top of the game.
-
The mediocre players (who are neither numerous nor visible) are most negatively affected by patches, because patches tend to remove a lot of the glitches, gimmicks and tricks that they rely on to generate wins. It just sucks for them because they don’t have the numbers or visibility needed to make the game developers care about them.