GHG
Member
It also included all the DLC and some game balance improvements I believe. That's how they got away with it. If it was just the dx11 patch then I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have.
-
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
It also included all the DLC and some game balance improvements I believe. That's how they got away with it. If it was just the dx11 patch then I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
I'm guessing that list of old games getting patched isn't going to grow substantially larger.
Because that's not what he's saying.
CrazedProfessional
Member
I mean if your trying to attract new consumers to market they would naturally explore the backlog they missed only to find the PS4 Slim basically treats the backlog the same way. Joe Average doesn't give a shit what you consider legacy. He sees a game on a shelf and expects his machine to run it. Like it runs the other Pro comparable games - not like a slim.
Maintenance
Member
Destiny Pro Patch - 19.99, with 3 free emotes.
Equanimity
Member
Good God.
That's exactly what potential PlayStation Pro consumers will do instead. smh
wesleyshark
Banned
*sad dance*
Sword Of Doom
Member
You know it
Lady Siara
Member
Please don't give them any ideas.
Why did the developer ask if Sony pays themselves to patch then? Make sense does it?!
Why did Ito say the fee depends on the thinking of the licensee?
You think developers simply choose how much they want to pay?
Look at the question and answer again
How is anyone getting the context that they're talking about the fees incurred by developers to release a patch from the above?!
Why would Sony then pay themselves, but not only that, but they would pay themselves a different amount depending on the title lol
Pretty much.
Maintenance
Member
CrazedProfessional
Member
Have you read Neogaf lately? That's exactly what people are considering for 4K discs. They would be feeling even better now that Sony is trying to bring paid resolution into play.
GHG
Member
Or it will because there is suddenly potential for publishers to make a quick buck.
Dragon1893
Member
I wouldn't be surprised. I actually made a post saying exactly this several months ago. Most publishers won't bother if they can't charge for it.
Fortunately it will be mandatory from here on out.
Fortunately it will be mandatory from here on out.
I'm almost certain something is lost in this translation. There is no way Sony would let third party publishers to charge for a patch. If anything, it's Sony who should pay third party publishers to bring a pro patch, to make the refresh more appealing.
Pay From Software to make 60fps Bloodborne patch.
Pay CDPR for 60fps or ultra setting patch.
Pay Bathesda for Fallout 4 patch.
It's not even funny if this is true. Sony has to pay up.
Pay From Software to make 60fps Bloodborne patch.
Pay CDPR for 60fps or ultra setting patch.
Pay Bathesda for Fallout 4 patch.
It's not even funny if this is true. Sony has to pay up.
Guys Sony will never pay 3rd party devs to make pro patches to older games.
If this potential consumer is only interested in playing the older games he should be buying a slim.
It's like saying that people wouldn't buy a PS3 because it ran PS2 software enhanced to PS3 levels.
If this potential consumer is only interested in playing the older games he should be buying a slim.
It's like saying that people wouldn't buy a PS3 because it ran PS2 software enhanced to PS3 levels.
Mufausa The 3rd
Member
Sounds like OP is trying to stir drama. They're definitely charging the devs if anything to release a patch for PS4Neo updates. Customers who bought the game should not have to pay for these.
Kenzodielocke
Banned
Not possible. Game must be the same on PS4 and PS4 pro.
AFAIK to show HDR devs need to go back and change assets.
disco potato
Member
I thought one of the reasons that games currently aren't updated very often is that client side patches have to get approved by sony and fees have to be paid? How is this any different?
So apparently the devs choose if they want to pay or not right? Depending on the title.
Seriously how are people thinking that the questions asked would be relating to a developers point of view. It's clear as day the question is asked from a consumer point of view.
Why would the PS4 Pro suddenly create a change in how charges for patches work for developers and publishers?
For anyone insistent that the interview is about how much developers pay, why would Sony pay themselves, and not only that but only for certain titles?!
Charging for patches or not, that's not going to happen - the vast majority of older games won't be patched.
I think it's a huge stretch also at this stage to say Sony 'is trying to bring in paid resolution'. The guy simply acknowledged what is an existing reality - licensees have control over what they make paid or not in DLC vs patches ( i guess outside of game-breaking fixes). There's many miles to go from that to 'Sony is advocating a paid-resolution-patch marketing policy'. If first party games charge for Pro-mode patches then there's something to talk about there.
While there's still a cert process, both Sony and MS had stopped charging for title updates by the end of last gen.
CrazedProfessional
Member
Older games are cheaper and PS4 Pro will have 4K all over its ads, I don't think many will read the small font so this is why it's a bad move.
Shit I know retail workers and they tell me all the time that people go straight for new console and preowned bundles. It's economics. Old content is new content if your eyes haven't seen it so if the Pro isn't capitalising on it then I guess people will buy the Slim or S leaving the Pros primary market as what; Neogaf users and Gamers too lazy to pay someone to build a PC?
Shit I know retail workers and they tell me all the time that people go straight for new console and preowned bundles. It's economics. Old content is new content if your eyes haven't seen it so if the Pro isn't capitalising on it then I guess people will buy the Slim or S leaving the Pros primary market as what; Neogaf users and Gamers too lazy to pay someone to build a PC?
lowhighkang_LHK
Member
Reading the translated interview again, it almost seems as if the interviewer is asking about the costs of updating their games. Will it be free (as in quick easy) or will it cost money (doing it properly, adding in a lot of features, more visual assets, improved resolution, framerate). And then Ito is responding, the costs will depend on the developer. If you do it quick and dirty, it shouldn't cost anything. If you do it well and proper, it'll cost the developer R&D.
And that mindset holds true for the follow question for Sony's games. It depends on the title.
I mean, with that mindset, re-read the translated interview.
And that mindset holds true for the follow question for Sony's games. It depends on the title.
I mean, with that mindset, re-read the translated interview.
JayWood2010
Member
Its not a big enough leap to call it ps5.
Don't worry; the emotes will still be available for purchase for the base version so they will still be able to meet that standard
ethomaz
Banned
It is free.
It has a fee (for developers) but it will become free (for consumers).
The Kotatsu translation didn't even match the Japanese words... they added things that didn't happened.
The Kotaku translation is correct.
Why are you talking like this "old" game wouldn't run on PS4 pro?
As far as we know all games will be automatically upscaled to 4K, but without a patch there won't be any added enhancement like better frame-rate, textures, effects.
You're trying to create a problem that, for now, only exists in your head.
ethomaz
Banned
Exactly.
JayWood2010
Member
Kotaku published this article. I saw it on twitter before seeing it on neogaf
hemo memo
Gold Member
They're the platform holders with a list of mandatory requirements on PS4Pro but they can't... Okay.
Why are you assuming that?
And if that is the case, why would the fee suddenly be waived just because.
If they were talking generally about a fee to produce and publish a patch that fee would be fixed, the same way licencing is charged to developers and publishers.
The costs to an indie developer to release something on the PS4 are the same, they don't change depending on the indie developer, or what game it is.
But yet people on here think it makes perfect sense that fees to release patches will vary depending who does it.
Not only that but people on here thinks it makes perfect sense for Sony to charge themselves depending on the title lol.
Also has anyone read the kotaku link?! They make it clear it's from a consumers point of view.
wesleyshark
Banned
Lol that's not what they are saying
Tell that to the people who already bought all the DLC.
DX11 instead of 9 means i can't use ENB, so it's really a paid downgrade.
ethomaz
Banned
Not if this is the real interview: http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/interview/1019310.html
We're moving into a different argument here.
But I think very few people buy a new console with eyes purely on older games. Most are going to be interested in at least the new 'annuals' (CoD, Fifa, whatever) as well as future games. I find it difficult to believe many people buy a system mid-way through a cycle without any interest in future content.
If a new Pro owner feels aggrieved at the lack of benefit for old games, they can always return or sell on the machine and get their 100 bucks back, and enjoy half the hard-drive space, less than half the GPU grunt on new games etc. Indeed, if you are only interested in older games, a Slim would be right for you.
TalentBurke
Member
The title of this thread should say ps4 games prior to the PS4pro release. Otherwise the title is misleading.
For new software under new devkits.
CrazedProfessional
Member
Regardless of points of view on the interview. Redefining DLC to include resolution for games old or new is a bad thing. For consumers and for gaming.
- Status