What I really find aggravating is that they say they fixed the bugs like it's something to be proud of. If there a bugs that break the game, shouldn't they be, I don't know, ironed out before it ships? Cause nobody likes playing a game that isn't playable on release. With the exception of say, The Witcher, I don't think there's been a single late fix game that has done really well.

But they really genuinely don't care! If a game is more than, say, six months old then it's on the scrap heap as far as most publishers are concerned.

And really, this is the huge problem I have with the modern gaming industry. It's become entirely profit-oriented to the point where it doesn't matter if the game sucks, sell 4 million copies and you're good. Or just release any unfinished crap, hype it like hell, and when it sells, never patch it and say it's all the pirates' fault that there's no support.

I agree with all but the assertion that this problem hasn't always existed.

The Witcher was playable when it was released, but it was half finished. Still, it was better then the beta's or even alpha's that EA is throwing to you and dare to ask € 50 for it.
Same goes actually for any Troika game; bug infested, but playable. However, most of those games were fixed by community patches. Obsidian comes also to mind, but they fix their stuff themselves. NWN 2 got a dozen of patches.
And yeah, it's nothing to be proud of about fixing things. That you're happy that something is now fixed is normal, but not something to be bragging about. But the problem is also that EA sticks to that always online DRM and it seems there is the problem. But they are stubborn to see that.