MadClacker
Member
So, in the last few months I've become increasingly concerned with the idea that "last gen" consoles will, at some point, go offline so to speak. Primarily I'm talking about the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3, but what I'm talking about can relate to the current generation of consoles also.
What I'm referring to when I say offline, is the fact that one day Sony and Microsoft will essentially disable the support and turn their servers for these consoles offline. I'm not just talking about Xbox Live or PSN servers that let me play with others online, I'm talking about the ability to download patches and firmware updates. They WILL go offline one day, that's perfectly understandable given the size and space all the patches, DLC content, and other updates for all these games must be taking up. The problem is when these go offline and we're unable to download these patches, assuming you don't have these games preloaded and fully updated prior to going offline, we are essentially left with a gimped console with games that are potentially broken, missing content, and contain some pretty significant bugs and issues.
What happens when we buy an Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 that doesn't have the latest firmware on it, and won't launch newer games?
The concept of retro gaming seems to have really become more popular over the last few years. Sure, many of those people that partake in the collecting of old games and consoles are people that weren't around at the time they were hitting store shelves, or were too young to remember, but still - it's becoming an increasingly popular subculture of gaming and one that will suffer many issues when it comes to the future and the consoles that are currently relevant.
Hypothetically speaking, 20 years from now someone buys a Playstation 3 from eBay and wants to play through a bunch of games (s)he played as a kid, or simply wishes to reminisce. They get the console, it may or may not have the latest firmware installed. They go to play a game and discover they cannot connect to the servers to download the (typically many) patches and updates. They're getting a gimped version of that game. Unfortunately, day one patches seem to have become a kind of "get out of jail free" card when it comes to development. Oftentimes, these patches enable a core feature of a game (see Uncharted 4 multiplayer), or fix some pretty glaring issues that, without it, make playing the vanilla 1.0 game unenjoyable, or flat out unplayable in some cases. It's a problem that lies not just with console gaming, but PC gaming also.
It's a genuine scenario that will occur at some point and I don't think there's an effective work around. I've said this before and I'll say it again: we need to significantly overhaul the way in which we handle patch updates for our games. And before you say it, I'm not proposing the most often said fix, which is to simply "make it work before release". Although that would be ideal, as games become a more complex medium to create for, patches will be necessary in many cases. However, relying on one source to obtain these patches - be it through Steam, PSN, Xbox Live - it is not a future proof way to handle them.
That's not even mentioning my own personal grief with how we deal with patches - how developers seem to force patch after patch addressing multiplayer content in a game that I personally don't wish to play multiplayer on. An example of this would be GTA V. I have no intention of playing this game online. Not that I can anyway due to having satellite internet. How about the new Doom? I didn't even play it on a console. I own Doom on PC and Steam MADE me download an 18GB update that pretty much had NOTHING to do with the single player game, and wouldn't let me play it until I did it. Even with fast internet and no bandwidth cap to take into consideration, it's a pain in the ass and ends up eating away at my hard drive space. I'd like to see the industry adopt a system to where patches for single player are separate from multiplayer. If I just want to play single player, I don't need to download countless GB's of updates. If I then decide to load up multiplayer, THEN ask me to download the patch. Sure, some games integrate the two, but there are many who don't.
But in attempt to get back to my original point - give me the ability to download the update file to my computer so I can store it locally. I understand the importance of having everyone on the same playing field (no pun intended) and using the same version, but it would be extremely helpful if I could download PS3, 360, or shit - even PS4 and Xbox One firmware updates and ESPECIALLY title updates to my computer. In 20XX if I decide to go back to play Bloodborne and I'm using a PS4 that didn't have it installed and updated already, I'm going to have a miserable experience with those long ass loading times. That's just one example. Games like Fallout or Elder Scrolls on version 1.0 would be disaster and would of course be missing many of the add-ons and DLC that we currently have to download. Maybe it's petty, but there are many games out there that truly NEED patches in order to function properly. I wish there was a way I could go to a site and download, say "PS4 Fallout 4 1.9 patch" and keep it on my computer.
Again, ideally I'd like to see games that don't need so many patches. Especially ones that fix issues that make me wonder how it passed QA in the first place, but that's just not realistic these days unfortunately.
So in short, I worry about "retro gaming" on PS3/360 and beyond in X amount of years from now.
I've talked about this among friends and various other social circles, but I'd be curious what GAF's input and predictions are on the matter.
Thanks!
What I'm referring to when I say offline, is the fact that one day Sony and Microsoft will essentially disable the support and turn their servers for these consoles offline. I'm not just talking about Xbox Live or PSN servers that let me play with others online, I'm talking about the ability to download patches and firmware updates. They WILL go offline one day, that's perfectly understandable given the size and space all the patches, DLC content, and other updates for all these games must be taking up. The problem is when these go offline and we're unable to download these patches, assuming you don't have these games preloaded and fully updated prior to going offline, we are essentially left with a gimped console with games that are potentially broken, missing content, and contain some pretty significant bugs and issues.
What happens when we buy an Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 that doesn't have the latest firmware on it, and won't launch newer games?
The concept of retro gaming seems to have really become more popular over the last few years. Sure, many of those people that partake in the collecting of old games and consoles are people that weren't around at the time they were hitting store shelves, or were too young to remember, but still - it's becoming an increasingly popular subculture of gaming and one that will suffer many issues when it comes to the future and the consoles that are currently relevant.
Hypothetically speaking, 20 years from now someone buys a Playstation 3 from eBay and wants to play through a bunch of games (s)he played as a kid, or simply wishes to reminisce. They get the console, it may or may not have the latest firmware installed. They go to play a game and discover they cannot connect to the servers to download the (typically many) patches and updates. They're getting a gimped version of that game. Unfortunately, day one patches seem to have become a kind of "get out of jail free" card when it comes to development. Oftentimes, these patches enable a core feature of a game (see Uncharted 4 multiplayer), or fix some pretty glaring issues that, without it, make playing the vanilla 1.0 game unenjoyable, or flat out unplayable in some cases. It's a problem that lies not just with console gaming, but PC gaming also.
It's a genuine scenario that will occur at some point and I don't think there's an effective work around. I've said this before and I'll say it again: we need to significantly overhaul the way in which we handle patch updates for our games. And before you say it, I'm not proposing the most often said fix, which is to simply "make it work before release". Although that would be ideal, as games become a more complex medium to create for, patches will be necessary in many cases. However, relying on one source to obtain these patches - be it through Steam, PSN, Xbox Live - it is not a future proof way to handle them.
That's not even mentioning my own personal grief with how we deal with patches - how developers seem to force patch after patch addressing multiplayer content in a game that I personally don't wish to play multiplayer on. An example of this would be GTA V. I have no intention of playing this game online. Not that I can anyway due to having satellite internet. How about the new Doom? I didn't even play it on a console. I own Doom on PC and Steam MADE me download an 18GB update that pretty much had NOTHING to do with the single player game, and wouldn't let me play it until I did it. Even with fast internet and no bandwidth cap to take into consideration, it's a pain in the ass and ends up eating away at my hard drive space. I'd like to see the industry adopt a system to where patches for single player are separate from multiplayer. If I just want to play single player, I don't need to download countless GB's of updates. If I then decide to load up multiplayer, THEN ask me to download the patch. Sure, some games integrate the two, but there are many who don't.
But in attempt to get back to my original point - give me the ability to download the update file to my computer so I can store it locally. I understand the importance of having everyone on the same playing field (no pun intended) and using the same version, but it would be extremely helpful if I could download PS3, 360, or shit - even PS4 and Xbox One firmware updates and ESPECIALLY title updates to my computer. In 20XX if I decide to go back to play Bloodborne and I'm using a PS4 that didn't have it installed and updated already, I'm going to have a miserable experience with those long ass loading times. That's just one example. Games like Fallout or Elder Scrolls on version 1.0 would be disaster and would of course be missing many of the add-ons and DLC that we currently have to download. Maybe it's petty, but there are many games out there that truly NEED patches in order to function properly. I wish there was a way I could go to a site and download, say "PS4 Fallout 4 1.9 patch" and keep it on my computer.
Again, ideally I'd like to see games that don't need so many patches. Especially ones that fix issues that make me wonder how it passed QA in the first place, but that's just not realistic these days unfortunately.
So in short, I worry about "retro gaming" on PS3/360 and beyond in X amount of years from now.
I've talked about this among friends and various other social circles, but I'd be curious what GAF's input and predictions are on the matter.
Thanks!