-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Silent Hill HD Collection Xbox 360 Patch Cancelled
- Thread starter Family Fry
- Start date
NinjaBoiX
Member
Yeah, but isn't the 360 version now at a bigger deficit than the PS3 version was? The patch added much of the fog back, fixed various bugs, and improved the frame rate, although that probably just means it runs like the 360 version does anyway.
Maybe I'm really reaching here, but what happens if the patch seriously screws up the collection on the Xbox 360 in some way? Then Konami has a game that's worse, and they've used up their one free patch.
I think back to Dark Souls, and how the PS3 version got multiple patches before the Xbox 360 version got its first. And then we were at a point where the PS3 version had to wait for patches, because From was waiting until it had enough major things to patch before releasing an Xbox 360 patch. There were clear and obvious examples in the case of that game where Microsoft's policies on patches had a clear effect on the game being fixed.
Has the 360 version received any patch yet?
Pretty sure the figure was for both Sony and MS patching.
Resources and technical issues usually don't indicate problems with the cost of patching.
toddhunter
Member
The technical performance of Downpour is close to being an outright disaster. Shitty framerates and an inconsistent progress saving system are the biggest culprits.
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
what? The "make sure you take enough time to QA your games or you will pay through the nose policy"
I'm far from a Microsoft defender but this seems like blame should be laid solely at the feet of konami, no one else.
PixyJunket
Member
Yes, every games gets one free patch certification although I cannot answer the second question.
Even if they were into their second patch, the nebulous $10,000 to $40,000 certification fee should be crumbs to a publisher as big as Konami and with a franchise as big and important as Silent Hill. Given that they felt the game was okay to release in the first place, their half attempt to fix one version and their flat out giving up on the other version really displays everything you need to know about Konami in this situation.
There's always plenty to attack Microsoft for, but pointing the finger at them for this is plain dumb (and I would wager in some cases, very agenda driven).
bone_and_sinew
breaking down barriers in gratuitous nudity
nanomachines
Solid warrior
Banned
It's affected with many technical problems. Poor framerate, stuttering, texture loading/pop in, some other graphical issues.
technical problems aside, the game is amazing.
Azure Dream
Member
So Microsoft should heavily examine and probably revise their patching policy for their next console. I think many people here agree with you on that.
Regardless of that, Konami still had the option of a free patch. If they botched that up, that's their fault, and they owe it to their consumers to fix the product, so that it plays and appears as they advertised it to. If that means paying a fee to fix the inferior initial product AND a wasted first patch effort on top of it, so be it.
reptilescorpio
Member
Yeah the $40k figure was for both platforms, some have said $30k just for MS but it seems like it could have changed at several points this generation.
Absolutely, very much a cost/benefit approach from Konami. If sales were low than post-release support was always going to be minimal, which really sucks. Like someone said earlier, Scott Pilgrim is getting a new piece of DLC (with a patch contained inside) 2 years after release on XBLA!
I don't think anyone knows of one. I wonder if there is a site that tracks updates and such.
Silly.Mikey
Banned
If they were tired of paying for patches on Xbox, they would have just said that. At least that could have been taken as `making a statement`. It could have made them look cheap maybe, but not incompetent. Now, they basically said, euh we cant fix it. Sorry. But go out and buy it!
These guys are morons plain and simple.
These guys are morons plain and simple.
It's part of why I'm still in favor of console exclusives within reason. Admittedly it's shifted from "take advantage of unique system features and hardware" to "which policies work best for the game we want to make," as it's really frustrating to see some games held back because of arbitrary Microsoft bullshit, namely patching and DLC.
What we should be finding out is if the 360 version has been patched at all.
Yup, pretty much.
Yup, pretty much.
IrishNinja
Member
hahaha...man.
ouch...bout what i expected, but (granted, different team) at least Homecoming didn't really give me that much trouble.
still on this free 6 month trial with blockbuster online, i wish they'd get a copy of this game on either platform to see for myself.
It's a good policy at heart, but it has hurt more than it has helped. The reality of the world of game development at this point is that screw-ups are going to happen in even the best of games. Yes, "release now, patch later" is a terrible way to handle a game, but when patches are needed it shouldn't make more economical sense for a developer/publisher to just not do one.
MightyHedgehog
Member
When I tried it out at launch, it didn't, but I haven't played it since (because it's a lazy crap release to begin with) and don't own it. It could have used one when I played it, though.
No they wouldn't.
Thank you. Did Konami ever put the first one up on PSN? Did they fuck that up too?
Well if they haven't received a patch yet, then I don't see how MS is at fault here.
Conspiracy theories aside, the most likely scenario is they saw the effect the patch had on the PS3 and decided the resources (manpower, money, etc) would not be worth the minimal improvement.
Bomber Bob
Banned
$2k certification
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
Sorry, your a more forgiving guy than I am. in the entireity of the previous generation, I can't think of one game I bought that was so buggy that it was unplayable. Why have things got so bad that games need multiple patches to even function?
the policy is there to prevent carelessness and encourage extensive QA. Maybe it should be looked at in the future, but the cost should serve as a deterrent to releasing a buggy game, not an excuse not to fix it.
They actually did fuck it up in Europe for a bit! They couldn't license a single piece of music, so they removed the original PS1 game from PSN for around 2 years! It suddenly reappeared this year I think.
MightyHedgehog
Member
It's possible, but it could have received a patch since then. I wouldn't know, but I'm sure someone here could verify. I think it's MS that may be preventing the approval of their submitted patch and they simply don't want to resubmit. Until there's more information revealed, I'm not willing to let the platform holder off so easily when other developers have expressed discontent with platform holder policy.
Yeah that's certainly a possibility, no arguments here. I just wish someone would confirm if it's been patched yet.
Some games still came with serious bugs, so it's basically a question of the lesser of two evils: making sure a game is released as good as it can be albeit without the ability to fix it, or to allow a mess of a game to come out but with easy patching. I tend to think the latter is preferable ultimately, it sucks to have a game broken out the gate, but it won't matter at all in the long run if they can get it working. And Microsoft is clearly trying to compromise here, but it doesn't seem to really be working out in anyone's favor.
AHA-Lambda
Member
I actually do not remember the last time a game was handled this badly, shocking stuff =/
An example hit just this week: Persona 4 Arena. Online multiplayer is fine on the PS3, not so fine on the Xbox 360. Online mulitplayer isn't an easy thing to get right, especially when pre-release testing can't always give you a true sense for how netcode will function once out in the option.
The game I mentioned earlier, Dark Souls, has had multiple patches. Sometimes you can't predict balancing issues that'll crop up, and changing things in one place can end up having side affects in other. Or, as our games get more and more complex, it can be difficult to think of every possible little situation that could crop up. Again, one of those happened in Dark Souls, and it was something that ended up completely breaking the balance of PvP in the game.
Obviously I would rather live in a world where every game is perfect when it's released, but that world isn't going to exist. Due to that, I'd prefer a world where developers don't need to jump through hoops to get patches done.
How are things on the PC side? Steam allows for unlimited patching of games based on developer discretion. Are PC games released in considerably worse shape than console games? (I'm asking because I really don't know, and I'm talking well-known developers.)
PepsimanVsJoe
Member
Konami has certainly done a fine job pissing on its legacy this generation.
In fact I'd say they've done the best job out of any publisher I've grown up with.
In fact I'd say they've done the best job out of any publisher I've grown up with.
I'd heard this collection was a mess because the people who ported it to current systems didn't have the final build to work with for any of the games, instead they were stuck with a near final beta that had plenty of bugs , limited budget , limited staff and basically only enough time to get the games "running" to the standard Konami asked (720p, 30 fps).
Perhaps it'd be better for someone out there to code up an emulator so people could at least just play an unmodified ISO of the game (and I don't mean a crack, I'm saying the original shipped game just selectable on a menu that the emulator proceeds to load up).
Perhaps it'd be better for someone out there to code up an emulator so people could at least just play an unmodified ISO of the game (and I don't mean a crack, I'm saying the original shipped game just selectable on a menu that the emulator proceeds to load up).
Broder Salsa
Banned
Didn't expect anything less from Konami.
U n i o n 0015
Member
I read that and went "hmmm...it basically says this game is crap but HEY! YOU CAN STILL BUY IT NOW!"
MightyHedgehog
Member
What's the difference in sales numbers between the versions? Would have to be pretty big to decide one version won't be fixed while the other was tried, at least once. Still, to admit that there is brokenness and to shrug it off is shitstained behavior, especially coming from a big corporate publisher just wringing more money out of old games that have earned them millions in revenue previously.
robotzombie
Member
Speaking of all of this, did the patch actually fix the game on the ps3? Did it make it worthwhile to buy at all?
ShockingAlberto
Member
Microsoft's patch policy is probably at fault.
Konami's shit job with the game in the first place is pretty fundamental to the problem, too.
Konami's shit job with the game in the first place is pretty fundamental to the problem, too.
Mr. Enigma
Member
They have fucking balls of steel to throw that at the end of the press release.
I think this confirms we will never see Tomm Hulett (GAF name "Roland Stiles") post here ever again.
A mod should give him a tag of "Available at retail".
I think this confirms we will never see Tomm Hulett (GAF name "Roland Stiles") post here ever again.
A mod should give him a tag of "Available at retail".
Silly.Mikey
Banned
Jumping through hoops? MS certification is one of the reasons that the ps3 COD fans are so consistently pissed that they dont get the same quality of "fixing" on their console but now (cause this thread demands it i guess) its a "hoop" that hurts the game industry...
The game according to this thread hasnt even been patched once on xbox yet (and that makes it free) and yet ur defending Konami for not wanting to improve a game at no cost and crucifying MS? Ive officially heard it all.
PixyJunket
Member
Previous posts in this thread indicate that it brought it up to the 360 version, which is still bad but not AS bad.
It's better, but still a crappy port. Hunt down the PS2 or PC versions of SH2 and SH3, don't waste your money. Better yet don't give Konami any more money.
This policy doesn't punish companies who put out buggy games. It only punishes those who attempt to fix them. It's a horrible policy that no one should support if they want better games
Sony and Microsoft both have to change some of their policies next gen. Sony needs to stop charging developers bandwidth to put up a demo on PSN and Microsoft needs to change their patching policy.
Eaten By A Grue
Member
Buy them used then. Konami will not make a dime.
This is bullshit. I have been holding off playing my Xbox360 copy until they patched the game. Looks like that is never going to happen. Also HD remakes are getting a bad rep, I really enjoyed Halo: Anniversary edition. I thought the dev got it right with that one.
First patch is free btw.
Though I agree that things need to change next Gen for both companies.
Mr. Enigma
Member
The patch price issue is an irrelevant argument because everyone gets one free patch. HD Collection never had a 360 patch if I remember correctly.
Similar threads
- Locked