wapplew
Member
If dev feel need to charge for Pro patch, simply don't patch then.
Don't start a bad precedent, we know how will this turn out if we let this slide.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PS4 Pro patches won't cost users money, like duh
- Thread starter benny_a
- Start date
- Status
If dev feel need to charge for Pro patch, simply don't patch then.
Don't start a bad precedent, we know how will this turn out if we let this slide.
tiebreaker
Member
I would be so disgusted if this is true.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
That game was already built with the higher quality content and tested on PC to run it. I am. It saying they should charge, but depending on the amount of work they do to take advantage of the extra specs there could be an internal business case for it.
I don't disagree at all. I won't pay for a resolution increase. I would be insulted.
There's isn't a single game we know of that's actually doing that, but that's the conclusion that's being jumped to.
If however, FROM wanted to go in and redo all the textures and models for bloodborne, I'd think about it if they decided that they couldn't do that for free.
Sony apparently pay themselves to release a patch too, but only certain titles as mentioned by Ito.
Also if that's what you honestly believe, there's not a cost to every developer as stated in the interview, as the interviewer is quite clearly asking whether developers pay a feww to produce a patch lol.
Seriously the reality is this interview isn't about developers, it's about consumers. But I give up....
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
That's exactly what it feels like.
With customer perception of the issue? Absolutely.
Were I an app developer, I'd be an idiot to charge iPhone 7 users to unlock better performance for my apps. Genuinely stupid move. I'd be better off lazily supporting the iPhone 7 and not take advantage of the new features than get the blowback.
But then most game developers should already have a prettier PC version. So, assets and extra graphical effects may not be expensive to integrate. Or using a 4K resolution mode. Hard to say. But if it's too much effort, I'd expect most developers to just drop it instead of charging money for the patch.
Shockingly, it's possible to discuss things that haven't happened yet. But might happen. That's what we're doing. What's your problem?
Perhaps if you are dealing with a rational people .
But these are gamers we are talking about. These people will simply see that said game is 2 years old and refuse to buy it as they think it it should be free or super cheap because it can b bought preowned for cheap.
This is why I expect old games to be patched with these features as an upgrade and/or games to be released as "enhanced" editions.
Sony make an absolutel mint of remakes, look no many people double dipped on tlou.
The bed has been made,gamers will now have to get into it
Audioboxer
Member
While I understand testing/certification is going to have a cost, I really think Sony should do something like for the first 6 months all Pro patches are free (if there is an added cost on top of normal patch costs).
At least that way its a reasonable plus to getting devs to patch old games and/or get used to putting out new games with dual modes.
In general I don't think it should cost at all (any update/patch), but shitty practices exist on closed platforms.
I think what he means it that it costs MS money to make the games backwardscompatible, but MS decided to bank those costs themselves and not hand them over to the consumer.
Dee Dah Dave
Member
It would only be for old games anyway.
All the new games have a Sony mandate to support the Neo. (To what extent though I don't know).
All the new games have a Sony mandate to support the Neo. (To what extent though I don't know).
GHG
Member
Yes and it costs consumers to buy the game in the first place. If you want a complete game (including all DLC) then it costs you north of $100 these days in most cases if you purchase at full price.
You're trying very hard to downplay everything about Pro nahhh ?
PS4 pro enhancements are mandatory for every game releasing after september 2016
lowhighkang_LHK
Member
How the hell does something have a fee, but then become free? What, why? To whom? Da fuq?
Equanimity
Member
Did you miss the plethora of upcoming pro enhanced games?
There are no new PS4 games coming out after October? :eep:
(As I understand it, Pro mode support in games is expected to be a day-one, not-patched-in feature for new games after September. Patching in Pro mode later is not allowed after that September/October deadline. Even if zero legacy games were patched, the point of it would be in the benefit to new games with their day one support.)
Sword Of Doom
Member
When people push back against UWP and what Microsoft is doing with PC games it's because they don't want something like this to happen one day
Not saying it's going to lead there but why go down that road?
This is like saying that there was no resson for buying a DualShock 3 because lots of launch games never got a rumble patch...
Stone Ocean
Member
That sounds pretty dumb, devs will likely just not make a patch instead of spending money and getting flak for it lol
grandwizard
Member
To all the posters saying that this is referring to developer-side fees: please read the actual translation and article. There is a section where they are referring to Sony published games and it is answered that some will be paid and some will be free. Sony would obviously not be charging themselves for patch fees so this has to be referring to patch fees on the consumer side.
I think Sony may clarify that this is untrue and clear the air about all this. However going on what has been said if you are saying this is all referring to developer fees then you have to explain that rationale because the text does not point to that.
I think Sony may clarify that this is untrue and clear the air about all this. However going on what has been said if you are saying this is all referring to developer fees then you have to explain that rationale because the text does not point to that.
I love how so many people are expecting free upgraded versions of games. I mean next month Bethesda is gonna be selling people a 60$ game that is 5 years old. Do people really think someone like R* (who sold 65 million copies of GTAV) will give you a free upgraded 4K version of it? Sensiblechuckle.gif
This entire PS4Pro and iterative console situation is ripe for devs/pubs to make extra money with and they will do just that. Even on PC when Nordic games released DarkSiders2 Deathinitive edition they tried charging previous owners of the game like 5-10$ for the upgrade iirc. After weeks of backlash they caved in and gave it for free but even then it still wasn't an automatic process. They forced people to go to some other site and log in with your steam credentials before adding the game to your library. If devs tried to pull that shit on steam where refunds and reviews exists then you bet your ass they will try doing it with consoles. Sony is not gonna be able to control other companies with this stuff. It will require extra work after all.
This entire PS4Pro and iterative console situation is ripe for devs/pubs to make extra money with and they will do just that. Even on PC when Nordic games released DarkSiders2 Deathinitive edition they tried charging previous owners of the game like 5-10$ for the upgrade iirc. After weeks of backlash they caved in and gave it for free but even then it still wasn't an automatic process. They forced people to go to some other site and log in with your steam credentials before adding the game to your library. If devs tried to pull that shit on steam where refunds and reviews exists then you bet your ass they will try doing it with consoles. Sony is not gonna be able to control other companies with this stuff. It will require extra work after all.
Bandai Namco charged PC users for the dx11 upgrade on Dark Souls 2 didn't they? People still bought Dark Souls 3!
This would be one of the shittiest moves a company has made in a really long time, if true. Would also absolutely make me boycott any pub/dev that tried to do it, just don't bother patching it if you need $$$ to justify it, or try and get Sony to open their wallet, don't make your consumers pay for it, after already buying your game anyway.
People in this thread just rushing to scream bloody murder.
The idea of paid patches will never apply to any new game after mid October.
I'd also like to see the stones on any publisher trying to charge for patches anyway.
I must say you've been a roll lately crazed.
It's rather impressive.
The idea of paid patches will never apply to any new game after mid October.
I'd also like to see the stones on any publisher trying to charge for patches anyway.
I must say you've been a roll lately crazed.
It's rather impressive.
I bet some devs will try gauge interest in certain games.
CrazedProfessional
Member
Why is Sony using devs as a human shield? Just call it the PS5 rather than confusing consumers with more types of optional paid "content"
Even if the charge is for older games the second hand market is huge and this situation is just confusing to the point where. Consumers would just buy an S or a Slim.
Even if the charge is for older games the second hand market is huge and this situation is just confusing to the point where. Consumers would just buy an S or a Slim.
Sword Of Doom
Member
OléGunner;216381355 said:
Nobody is screaming anything. People just saying its a bad idea mostly
Might get more sales. Regenerate hype for an old game like Shadow of Mordor
Was that only a DX 11 upgrade though?
GHG
Member
This is true but I think there are more instances of developers giving out dx11/dx12 patches and the like for free than those who charge for them.
You remember the exact same reaction when it was first mentioned that the PS4 Pro didn't have a 4k blu-ray player? Disbelief, questioning the source etc
The thing is though that the anger would die down, as people would then realise it's only referencing currently released games.
Although if this is true and certain developers or even Sony themselves tried charging for a pro patch then man oh man they'd be in for a serious wake up call.
They remember what the internet backlash resulted in for Microsoft on their Xbox One announcement.
One thing I do believe though is even if it's true, Sony will just simply "waive" any fees, the same way Microsoft "waived" certain policies, and 6 months down the line everyone will have forgotten
Memorabilia
Member
I think we need to be clear there's a huge difference between charging for an actual patch that merely turns on engine scalability in PS4 games for higher end hardware like the Pro (relatively little work) vs. charging for something more justifiable like a remaster. If some of these "patches" actually improve on existing assets then, sure, there might be some justification to charge a *small* fee. But allowing for higher FPS, AA, AF, etc...is a function that generally already exists in most game engines.
What?? Really? How come I never heard of this?
Discussion is good. It's what we're doing right now. I was commenting on the people that read the headline, and post "This is and arrogant anti-consumer disaster" and don't bother thinking about it or discussing it at all.
GHG
Member
Please stop. You're just twisting this into being something you want it to be when it clearly isn't.
He's referring to Scholar of the First Sin
I'm not entirely sure what you mean there. To be clear - all legacy games will work on Pro. They don't need to be patched, they're not being held for ransom. If a dev wants a legacy game to have Pro optimisations, a specific Pro mode, then they'd have to patch them.
If a pattern emerged of publishers charging for those patches, then we could talk about Sony not standing up for what's in the interests of Pro appeal/penetration. In the meantime we're arguing about a technical possibility based on licensee agreements - not a Sony policy about how patches should be handled. I think it's fairly obvious this guy was acknowledging that he cannot say or control what licensees do here - not announcing a active policy about marketing legacy Pro mode patches commercially or for profit.
ethomaz
Banned
Read the translation...
Every game has a fee to make a patch but it will be free for us.
The Kotatsu translation messed that.
The fanboyism is strong with this one. Why doesn't Nintendo make the New 3DS 3DS-2 or whatever?
Almost feel like these threads causing a ton of drama over unfounded (for now) claims based off of sketchy translation should perhaps be disallowed... Does nothing but enrage a bunch of people and it's most likely the inference people are taking from this thread is completely wrong.
I would be dead against it.
I also think some people are overblowing how much effort it will actually take to produce these "Pro patches".
Especially on multiplatform games, where the games are developed on pc and things like higher quality assets etc are already baked in, and things like framerate limits are not months of work to simply remove.
It's almost as if people think it will take developers 12 months to produce an update with improved visuals. Developers wouldn't need to work from the ground up, they've already got the higher quality assets etc
Going by that logic do they think that developers spend many years more working on the pc versions lol. Afterall pc games have higher framerates, better levels of aa, higher resolution textures etc. Of course they don't spend lot's of extra time, they develop the game and simply scale back depending on the platform, the difference being that the pc source has settings open to consumers to adjust to suit their hardware, so the user can scale things like texture quality, aa etc themselves. But when I download a game like DOom and choose what type of texture quality I would like, all of it is in the code already, I'm just simply "flicking a switch".
wesleyshark
Banned
Not necessarily. Sony isn't ruling out any scenario.
thetester77
Member
Your lost in translation.
Costs the COMPANY to patch...... not the customer to buy a patch.
Why are so many people misunderstanding this?
- Status