I think that's what it is. But we need some confirmation.Could Ito mean it would cost the developer - not the customer - to implement the patch?
It would be a mistake to charge the customer a patch for 4K and HDR.
I think that's what it is. But we need some confirmation.Could Ito mean it would cost the developer - not the customer - to implement the patch?
It would be a mistake to charge the customer a patch for 4K and HDR.
most people are doubting it and are critical of the source though
Poor Brian Ashcraft, he seemingly missed the entire generation of 720p, 1080i, 1080p and Full/Limited RGB complications.Brian Ascraft said:The PS4 Pro is making this new era of complicated gaming even more so.
most people are doubting it and are critical of the source though
Apple refreshes their shit every year and they don't have this problemTo be fair, these new consoles are tricky to sell/define. They have no way to show off their amazing new features via a YouTube/twitch stream. They don't want to alienate their current userbase as well as 1080p owners. They simply don't know which developers will provide patches for their old games. Hard to get the messaging right when there are so many moving parts.
Original GameWatch Interview Section said:――従来タイトルの4K・HDR化に関してはパッチ対応ということですが、これは有料でしょうか? それとも無料で行われるのでしょうか?
伊藤氏:タイトルごとによって違いますね。それぞれのライセンシーさんの考え方によると思います。
――SIEさんとしてはいかがでしょうか?
伊藤氏:うちもタイトルごとによって異なると思います。
――タイトルごとに有料になったり無料になったりすると言うことですね。
伊藤氏:そうです。
Translation said:GW: So, in terms of future games supporting 4K/HDR: Will the patches be free, or will there be a cost?
Masayasu Ito: I think it will be different depending on the title and the way each licensee/third-party thinks about it.
GW: How about when it comes to SIE?
Masayasu Ito: I think that it will differ for each title within the company*. (*The different sects within SIE is what is implied)
GW: So, you're saying that depending on the title, there could be a fee, or it could be free?
Masayasu Ito: That's right.
isn't Konami doing this with MGSV: definitive edition and only this version that gets the 4K?
Because that's what people gravitate towards.
The Last Of Us (PS3): A graphical powerhouse, a must buy!
The Last of Us Remastered (PS4): That old PS3 version looks terrible. Buy literally the same game again with better graphics.
The Last of Us Remastered 4K Mode (PS4 Pro): That old 1080p version looks terrible. Buy this patch for better graphics in 4K.
In 3 years time:
The Last Of Us: Ultimate Remaster (PS5): That old upscaled 4K version looks terrible. Buy it again, now in Native 4K!
..and so on. Forever.
Hey, it works for home video releases!
No matter the outcome, I will update thread and ask a mod to update the thread title with CONFIRMED or KOTAKU'D (Although based on MysticDistance's post it very much is not clear based on the source material.)Cant wait for this thread to blow up for absolutely nothing with a bunch of "arogant sony is back" comments and pictures of people buying Xbones while actually relevant news gets like 500 replies
Huh? All that says that some may be free and some may not be free. How is that not consistent with the question of the thread?Sssshhh, you've ruined it now. This was gong to be another one of those entertaining threads you get whenever somebody announces new hardware.
Sssshhh, you've ruined it now. This was gong to be another one of those entertaining threads you get whenever somebody announces new hardware.Yeah, just looked through the article. Not certain, so correct me if there's any mistake, but it sounds very much like the company director of SIE (Masayasu Ito) is saying that depending on some licensees/third-parties, it'll be free and some will be paid (to make a 4K patch)
Seems more like this is what happends when theres misunderstanding involvedThis is what happens when a gaming company thinks they are above the purchasing power of the consumer.
HahahaMaybe No Man's Sky will have a paid patch that adds multiplayer.
If the updated translation is anything to go by then it seems to be a completely inaccurate translation and they're saying that they'll paying some developers to do the patches but not others. Probably just for the higher profile games.Don't devs have to pay for patches of any form on consoles? What's the difference here?
... it'll be free and some will be paid (to make a 4K patch)
GW: So, each title will have a fee, but it will become free?
Masayasu Ito: That's right.
What does that have to do with devs paying for a patch?This is what happens when a gaming company thinks they are above the purchasing power of the consumer.
If its being released late october or later then its simply mandated to have pro support in some way. Day 1 or patch.
The level of entitlement of gamers never ceases to amaze me. If developers have to do significant work to add Pro mode why shouldn't they be able to charge for it?
If this means I get more games running better then I'm all for it. Don't like it? Don't think a game looks improved enough? Then don't buy it.
so basically if you want the 4K you have to buy the new edition for 50$.
But seriously, whether the interview was incorrectly translated, people expect publishers to have devs working on a patches for old titles for free?
Fully expecting something like "Witcher 3 PS4 Pro Patch - Now allows for 1080p60 / 4K* 60fps and other graphical improvements for PS4 Pro / $5.99. *Actually 4Kpr"
The launch patches will probably be free as an incentive, and all new titles will be at no added cost, but aside from some evergreen titles like GTAV (although I bet people would be willing to pay for a good "Pro GTA V" patch), I don't really expect many free PS4P patches for old titles (a few probably, perhaps trying to get the title back in active sales)
most people are doubting it and are critical of the source though
It would indeed cost money to make such patch, but i also think that its optional for older games. I mean, if they want to charge for it, fair enough that they try that, but they dont have to make it.But seriously, whether the interview was incorrectly translated, people expect publishers to have devs working on a patch for old titles for free?
Fully expecting something like "Witcher 3 PS4 Pro Patch - Now allows for 1080p60 / 4K* 60fps and other graphical improvements for PS4 Pro / $5.99. *Actually 4Kpr"
The launch patches will probably be free as an incentive, and all new titles will be at no added cost, but aside from some evergreen titles like GTAV (although I bet people would be willing to pay for a good "Pro GTA V" patch), I don't really expect many free PS4P patches for old titles (a few probably, perhaps trying to get the title back in active sales)
Ruining with what?Why must Sony insist on ruining their marketshare?
But seriously, whether the interview was incorrectly translated, people expect publishers to have devs working on a patch for old titles for free?
Fully expecting something like "Witcher 3 PS4 Pro Patch - Now allows for 1080p60 / 4K* 60fps and other graphical improvements for PS4 Pro / $5.99. *Actually 4Kpr"
The launch patches will probably be free as an incentive, and all new titles will be at no added cost, but aside from some evergreen titles like GTAV (although I bet people would be willing to pay for a good "Pro GTA V" patch), I don't really expect many free PS4P patches for old titles (a few probably, perhaps trying to get the title back in active sales)
What does that have to do with devs paying for a patch?
I hope there's only a few of you out there.The level of entitlement of gamers never ceases to amaze me. If developers have to do significant work to add Pro mode why shouldn't they be able to charge for it?
If this means I get more games running better then I'm all for it. Don't like it? Don't think a game looks improved enough? Then don't buy it.
Didn't you get the memo?What does that have to do with devs paying for a patch?
The corrected translation doesn't actually say what you say it does though. It states that some developers will be paid by them to upgrade the games while others won't. It's about them being proactive with some games but not with the others.Huh? All that says that some may be free and some may not be free. How is that not consistent with the question of the thread?
If the updated translation is anything to go by then it seems to be a completely inaccurate translation and they're saying that they'll paying some developers to do the patches but not others. Probably just for the higher profile games.
I don't speak the language though, it's not my translation.
How do we know the interview is referring to devs paying to patch.
See the thing that confuses me, is if there is infact a cost for a developer to produce and publish a patch why would that cost be waived for certain developers and games?
That doesn't make sense either.
I payed for the better graphics when I bought a PS4 Pro. Its no different than buying different versions of the same game.. they may cost the same but offer varying levels of quality.
If the original doesnt get patched.
Expecting something like this.
That doesn't make sense to me at all.The corrected translation doesn't actually say what you say it does though. It states that some developers will be paid by them to upgrade the games while others won't. It's about proactive with some games but not with the others.
Not my translation but that's what it says.