Support NeoGAF

[kmfdmpig]

Why? You paid for the software to run in a PS4. and it runs. And it will run on a PS4 pro as well. It won't have the enhancement that is possible in the pro because it wasn't coded in the software. So if it required for the devs to revisit old code and write who knows how much more new code, new assets etc to make it better (4k upscale/HDR) asking for a fee is ok on my book.

I write code for a living. Why in the hell do you want me to spend how much more time in a old game that works fine for free?

I don't disagree, but presuming that the Pro sells well wouldn't there be an argument that making an improved version for that platform could lead to new sales?

I don't imagine that many 2013 games sell all that well 2-3 years later, but if there is a new shiny coat of paint applied it might lead to a healthy bump in sales for those who skipped vanilla PS4 and went straight for the Pro.

 

[Garrett 2U]

That sounds like a terrible business plan, in my opinion.

I don't necessarily want to buy a new console then spend 10$/game to take advantage of the power.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

Why? You paid for the software to run in a PS4. and it runs. And it will run on a PS4 pro as well. It won't have the enhancement that is possible in the pro because it wasn't coded in the software. So if it required for the devs to revisit old code and write who knows how much more new code, new assets etc to make it better (4k upscale/HDR) asking for a fee is ok on my book.

I write code for a living. Why in the hell do you want me to spend how much more time in a old game that works fine for free?

I write code for a living too. Making my customers feel like they got a crazy good deal is the #1 most important thing to my continued employment. If the customer is happy with their hardware and software (even though I'm just a software guy) then I get to keep my job.

That means I spend time fixing bugs, supporting new features, and embracing new hardware. For no extra cost. That's how it works.

Charging for a Pro Patch will make your customers feel like they got the shaft. Congrats, you're burning bridges. Hope that extra cash you made was worth it.

 

[PLASTICA-MAN]

Since when getting the better hardware to enjoy better graphics and resolution requires also to pay for changing the settings and graphical options? So, in some games if you get a PS4 Pro but don't pay for the patches, you will be stuck playing the same PS4 game. Why bother then? I know PS4 Pro is not the same case like a better PC but still this is so much.
Even phones don't do that (for the moment) as getting a more powerful phone allows you to play a better looking game (depending on the game ofc).

I really hope this is 100% not true for all games. First, they kept the sku with the weak specs, then no UHD Bluray Player and now this.

 

[OCD Guy]

Thats simply unacceptable to leave out there as a question. Im going to stick with my thought that this is not being understood properly or that the guy was misunderstood. Sony should be asked this again directly and if the answer is anything but a clear no then we have a real messaging problem here.

Duckroll who I assume speaks the language has stated there's no error in translation.

The issue I'm having is that people are reading the English translation and somehow read it as though it was referring to costs that developers incurred, which again wouldn't make sense as the costs I imagine are fixed. I doubt there would be variation in costs, EA surely don't have different fees than Activision for example.

Also if the context of the interview was regarding fees that developers incurred, why would they ask how much Sony pay?

It get's better though, as not only is the interview about how much developers pay Sony to produce a patch, the interview also states how Sony are going to pay developers to produce patches for the PS4 Pro.

I don't think this response could make it any clearer:

Ito: It will be different for each title. I believe it will depend on the thinking of each licensee.

The fee will depend on the thinking of each licensee. We know what a licensee refers to right???????????

 

[FonkyByNature]

I will wait for more clarification but if that's true then i will never buy the PS4 Pro.

Sad because i like the Pro but i can't support something like this, we're already paying a lot for PS+, DLC and all kind of other crap. This is too much on top of a console that already costs 500$ Canadian. I think i will keep my original PS4 and see how this whole thing plays out.

 

[Vire]

• Increase price of PS Plus by 10 dollars with no percievable benefit and have your service remain incredibly shitty
• Not include a HD BR Player in the PS4 Plus in order to save $15 per sale
• Charge the consumer for patches that up resolution and framerate on your new system
• #powertotheshareholders

Nothing about this system is appealing. It's a greedy, rushed, half-assed money grab that in a year will have inferior multi-platform games running on it.

 

[gofreak]

Wait so is this consumer charge for already relaese/pre Pro games or stuff going forward as well?

For those interested would we be seeing "Call of Duty Infinite Warfare: Pro Patch $59.99"?

There's no patching-in of Pro modes past a certain point in late Sept or October. So it's a bit moot.

For legacy games prior to that...let's see if anyone actually tries to charge for a Pro Mode. I've my doubts anyone will. The probable PR nightmare in charging purely for a res bump wouldn't be worth the risk.

 

[BossDarkseid]

Once again as some seems to have a lot of comprehension problems :This could happen, depending on the publishers (Sony's not responsible for 3rd party patches devlopment) but only for games released before october. After october, enhancements for the Pro are mandatory

....so cost updates would only be pre Oct games?

I have comprehension problems anyway but I find it a tad confusing. Sorry

 

[Omnistalgic]

Based on what I'm reading, the cert costs associated with testing the patch to 4k will be waived for a time for 3rd parties, depending on the game and release of the patch. Games after that window will then be charged normally. Sony's also looking at paying to help incentivise 3rd parties to develop patches for their existing games (or that incentive might only be waived patch fees, not sure on that one).

I think the title should at least be updated to let posters know this isn't talk specific to charging consumers. I doubt anyone would be dumb or arrogant enough to consider charging end users for system patches. Not even old Arrogant Sony.

Edit: The whole thing is basically a non answer to patch fees.

Yea thread title needs changing. Seems like it's talking about consumers at first glance

 

[fbutron]

Another drama for an nonissue Sony generally dont charge DEVELOPERS see Silent hill HD where Ps3 was patched but not on 360 since the developer said it will cost significant money

 

[Jotaka]

MS don't charge thier consumer to run their BC games with all the bells and whistles XB1 provides.

So. but do you understand that they spend money (man power) to do that, right? MS decided that it will eat the cost to do that, its their business decision.

 

[Maintenance]

Nintendo levels of stupidity.

 

[jeffram]

1. No one is confirmed doing this. The norm as we know it is for the patches to be free.
2. There's a difference between remastering a game with better assets and using the resolution. One can be very costly.

Maybe people should wait to see how this plays out, and what publishers feel is worth money (if they decide that at all) before getting outraged. Seriously, outrage culture is annoying. Extreme reactions to a sound bite, no context or facts necessary.

 

[lowhighkang_LHK]

#NoProPatchFee
Sony should not allow to anyone charge for pro patch.

But in that case, why would developers spend the time and manpower creating a NEO mode, on what is basically an old, irrelevant game?

This is why Sony had to mandate that all PRO modes on games released October and after must include a PRO mode free of charge to consumers.

Forcing developers / publishers that if they create a PRO mode on older titles that it must be free, then developers will opt simply not to do a PRO mode. That's just lost money to them when they could use that money and manpower and project still in development.

I think you have two realistic outcomes:

Developers will add a PRO patch to their old games for free, hoping it reignites interest in their game / franchise / IP

And

Developers won't ruin brand name/company image by asking for a PRO patch download cost to their old game, also realizing it probably won't be purchased all that much, and simply opt to do nothing and leave their game as is.

 

[Thabass]

I had thought that Sony already said Pro patch upgrades were free. Maybe I misread.

 

[BossDarkseid]

There's no patching-in of Pro modes past a certain point in late Sept or October. So it's a bit moot.

For legacy games prior to that...let's see if anyone actually tries to charge for a Pro Mode. I've my doubts anyone will. The probable PR nightmare in charging purely for a res bump wouldn't be worth the risk.

Ah, ok. Thank you.

I'm not sure what pre Oct games I would pay for a patch for. Not many at least. Thanks for making it clearer.

 

[xion4360]

MS don't charge thier consumer to run their BC games with all the bells and whistles XB1 provides.

Yea because they understand that those benefits come from the hardware the consumer paid for. I know it may take some time effort and money to produce a patch for released games to benefit the PS4 pro, thats why its an option and not any sort of mandate from sony.

 

[Sweep14]

MS don't charge thier consumer to run their BC games with all the bells and whistles XB1 provides.

Lol. This is not refering to backward compatibility at all... I can guarantee you that every PS4 title already released will work perfectly on PS4 Pro, without any patch or any loss of quality

 

[Norwegian_Imposter]

I think this might be a lost in translation thing personally.

 

[Fishlake]

Once again as some seems to have a lot of comprehension problems :This could happen, depending on the publishers (Sony's not responsible for 3rd party patches devlopment) but only for games released before october. After october, enhancements for the Pro are mandatory

Oh I understand that. However if this is successful I fully expect to see more of it in the future. Kind of like gachas or micro transactions.

 

[The Jackdog]

Once again as some seems to have a lot of comprehension problems :This could happen, depending on the publishers (Sony's not responsible for 3rd party patches devlopment) but only for games released before october. After october, enhancements for the Pro are mandatory

everytime i read something like this, i think back to the launch of the xbox 360. i remember reading in i think EGM about how the xbox marketplace was going to have dlc. i remember specifically reading the line "this isnt about nickle and diming consumers. its about being able to sell meaningful expansions on our games" and thinking "wow, this COULD be bad, but it wont be"

yes, theres a chance there is nothing to worry about and this is all dumb speculation.

but i think anyone who follows video games is jaded enough now that when we see a company MAYBE doing something a little weird or shady, we assume its weird and shady.

 

[mangochutney]

Unless Sony says, 'developers, thall shall not charge', they cannot speak for other studios and developers. So he cannot answer the question and say they'll all be free in case some studio decides it wants to have the courage to charge for a patch. Simple as.

 

[Equanimity]

Seems like some people have made up their mind. I don't believe Sony or any pub for that matter is stupid enough to charge for a patch that optimises and enhances the visuals.

 

[Guymelef]

• Increase price of PS Plus by 10 dollars with no percievable benefit and have your service remain incredibly shitty
• Not include a HD BR Player in the PS4 Plus in order to save $15 per sale
• Charge the consumer for patches that up resolution and framerate on your new system
• #powertotheshareholders

Nothing about this system is appealing. It's a greedy, rushed, half-assed money grab that in a year will have inferior multi-platform games running on it.

Don't cry kid.

 

[Poster#1]

This like a PC game charging you for having a new GPU. Crazy.

 

[FairXchange]

Why? You paid for the software to run in a PS4. and it runs. And it will run on a PS4 pro as well. It won't have the enhancement that is possible in the pro because it wasn't coded in the software. So if it required for the devs to revisit old code and write who knows how much more new code, new assets etc to make it better (4k upscale/HDR) asking for a fee is ok on my book.

I write code for a living. Why in the hell do you want me to spend how much more time in a old game that works fine for free?

Get your common sense out of here! But yeah, New games will have support for ps4 pro at launch. This is regarding old games getting patched? How many games will ultimately be patched? How many of those will charge? Of those, how many will people even feel compelled to purchase said paid patch? I think this is a non issue ultimately.

 

[OCD Guy]

Yea thread title needs changing. Seems like it's talking about consumers at first glance

It is.

Are people honestly thinking that the interviewer asked how much Sony pay to produce a patch for their own game? C'mon.

The interviewer after being told that some third parties could charge for a patch, then went onto ask whether Sony published games would also charge, to which Ito then responded that it would vary per title.

If they were talking about the fee developers pay to release a patch, that fee would be fixed. Also why would an interviewer suddenly ask how much developers pay to produce and push a patch. It's obviously in relation to consumers as these upgraded consoles are unknown territory for consumers.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

I don't believe this.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

1. No one is confirmed doing this
2. There's a difference between remastering a game with better assets and using the resolution. One can be very costly.

Maybe people should wait to see how this plays out, and what publishers feel is worth money (if they decide that at all) before getting outraged. Seriously, outrage culture is annoying. Extreme reactions to a sound bite, no context or facts necessary.

Outrage at outrage culture is far more annoying.

Sorry, you're not Mr. Level Headed just because you disagree.

 

[Ferr986]

I don't think any dev will have the balls to charge a fee for it. Too bad press for them. They'll rather just not patch it.

 

[Jotaka]

I write code for a living too. Making my customers feel like they got a crazy good deal is the #1 most important thing to my continued employment. If the customer is happy with their hardware and software (even though I'm just a software guy) then I get to keep my job.

That means I spend time fixing bugs, supporting new features, and embracing new hardware. For no extra cost. That's how it works.

Charging for a Pro Patch will make your customers feel like they got the shaft. Congrats, you're burning bridges. Hope that extra cash you made was worth it.

In this case... the best approach for the devs is do nothing. lol

 

[Memorabilia]

Why? You paid for the software to run in a PS4. and it runs. And it will run on a PS4 pro as well. It won't have the enhancement that is possible in the pro because it wasn't coded in the software. So if it required for the devs to revisit old code and write who knows how much more new code, new assets etc to make it better (4k upscale/HDR) asking for a fee is ok on my book.

I write code for a living. Why in the hell do you want me to spend how much more time in a old game that works fine for free?

With scalable engines on x86 arch this is absolutely a bullshit argument. Should PC gamers have to pay for "performance patches" to make games they already own look better if they buy a new GPU? Jesus Christ on a jackhammer. Hell, let's start defending the idea of nVidia and AMD releasing driver updates for new GPU silicon too. Own a Maxwell card but want to upgrade to Pascal? Cool. Pony up for the new GPU and if you want your games to look better prepare to bend over and pay for those games to utilize the new GPU.

The upside of this thread is it proves there's a defense force for literally *everything*, no matter how ridiculous.

 

[Sweep14]

I had thought that Sony already said Pro patch upgrades were free. Maybe I misread.

They will not charge theirs and I would be very surprised to see other publishers trying to do it. Begining next month, this talk will be over though.

 

[LeleSocho]

that's suicide

 

[vpance]

That sounds like a terrible business plan, in my opinion.

I don't necessarily want to buy a new console then spend 10$/game to take advantage of the power.

This is only for old games, not new ones released after Sep.

 

[FFMafia]

While I don't agree on everyone blowing up for every single issue that has presented itself since Wednesday means ps4 pro is bad, just the fact that it's created confusion and bad word of mouth is already something either Sony should fix or the pro will not sell ps4-like numbers

 

[Curufinwe]

• Increase price of PS Plus by 10 dollars with no percievable benefit and have your service remain incredibly shitty
• Not include a HD BR Player in the PS4 Plus in order to save $15 per sale
• Charge the consumer for patches that up resolution and framerate on your new system
• #powertotheshareholders

Nothing about this system is appealing. It's a greedy, rushed, half-assed money grab that in a year will have inferior multi-platform games running on it.

Nothing appealing but much better performance for only $50 or $100 more than other consoles on the market.

Try not to drown in your own salt as it becomes another hugely successful console release for Sony.

 

[JustenP88]

Outrage at outrage culture is far more annoying.

Sorry, you're not Mr. Level Headed just because you disagree.

The 'outrage at outrage culture' doesn't shit up the entire front page of a gaming forum.

I honestly don't expect many third party devs to bother wasting the resources to patch their old games anyway.

This.

 

[jett]

I honestly don't expect many third party devs to bother wasting the resources to patch their old games anyway.

 

[Loudninja]

There's no patching-in of Pro modes past a certain point in late Sept or October. So it's a bit moot.

For legacy games prior to that...let's see if anyone actually tries to charge for a Pro Mode. I've my doubts anyone will. The probable PR nightmare in charging purely for a res bump wouldn't be worth the risk.

Yeah pretty much I dont see I wonder was this policy always in place.

 

[JBwB]

So these fees for the Pro patches only apply to older games / games released before the Pro right? If so then that's understandable and I have no problem with it.

I do however expect these patches to be more than a mere resolution bump if they are going to be paid.

 

[SenkiDala]

#NoProPatchFee
Sony should not allow to anyone charge for pro patch.

Well for the patch of Metro 2033 and Darksiders 2 on PC, they asked me to pay because I didn't have the "frenchise pack" but just the game, so... It's just same.

And it's just for old titles so it's not that big of a deal.

Also think about that publishers pays developpers to make 4K patches old games for PS4 pro, it costs them money, they'll of course bring this costs to the consumers. :/

 

[MisterXDTV]

I don't understand this: we are talking about money cost for Sony or for consumers???

I think Sony will likely pay devs to patch big games, but that doesn't mean we have to pay for that

 

[Panajev2001a]

Think of this as continued customer service rather than charity. You would still be paid to write the code. The person paying you can choose to not charge his customers for it because the people most likely to make the most use of such an upgrade would be loyal Hardcore fans who will continue to buy all the other ganes you code for your employer as long as they feel valued and loved.

Sure and I agree with you, but by the same token season passes and paid DLC's should also go away.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

I don't think any dev will have the balls to charge a fee for it. Too bad press for them. They'll rather just not patch it.

Honestly I don't know anymore. Nickel and Dime the consumer is the business right now. It's sad

Regarding this, Sony better jump in front of it asap if it's not true

 

[ethomaz]

Patches are free for consumers.

They cost for developers do them.

 

[UrbanRats]

Nothing appealing but much better performance for only $50 or $100 more than other consoles on the market.

Try not to drown in your own salt as it becomes another hugely successful console release for Sony.

And he should care, because... ?

 

[CrazedProfessional]

If sony doesn't pay the devs won't patch so the point of owning a pro is moot.

 

[The Jackdog]

In this case... the best approach for the devs is do nothing. lol

not really. im sure they have the data to back it up, but personally i see a lot more value in giving your game a pro patch and then launching a brand new ad campaign for your game talking about all the pro enhancements while chopping off a few bucks from the MSRP.