• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Silent Hill HD Collection Xbox 360 Patch Cancelled

Would have been better to say nothing and have gamers forget about that POS they released. Did they say anything about the Downpour patch they announced as well?
 
AnEternalEnigma said:
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.
Click to expand...

Even if they already used the freebie, to patch a game on 360 is only $10K, the $40K figure some people post is incorrect. The 40K is sorta a misquote of what Tim Shaffer said a while back, for him to patch one of his games on both 360 and PS3 cost 40k.
 
And i will say this, having started off at a fairly big a video game company as a QA tester a long time ago, we had to deal with a different certification all the time. We basically had a checklist to go through (that we had to make, they didn't even provide one) and basically checked out everything that was important to make sure that the game passed certification, cause if it didn't we had to dish out 5 to 10 grand every time we sent the game in to certification.

Although its annoying to pay when it doesn't go through, and you definitely hear about it, you know what that does ultimately? It makes damn well sure that your team doesn't miss anything big and you rest easy knowing your game or patch works great enough to be released to the public.

So ya, there's a cost but in the end its proven to be beneficial to us. Certification isn't all bad.
 
Kusagari said:
Yeah, which is probably the real reason they canceled it. No point paying the fee for the patch when it barely does anything.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The patch is fucking shit. They should have said, "The resources or SMARTS to make the patch actually improve the game." I also have no problem with certification. Its there for a reason.

We aren't able to fix our shit. Buy our shit worldwide!
 
Silly.Mikey said:
So ya, there's a cost but in the end its proven to be beneficial to us.
Click to expand...
And in this case? Was it really beneficial to customers who already paid for their copies to sit there and know that they won't get their shit fixed because platform holders refuse to be more reasonable in properly servicing their end user? In the end, the current setup sucks and is the opposite of where things are going. Of course, when next gen comes, they will adopt what other successful marketplaces are and have been doing, partly because the rest of the gaming market isn't doing what console makers do now and because next-gen console OSes will be better-suited to a hands-off approach.
 
MightyHedgehog said:
And in this case? Was it really beneficial to customers who already paid for their copies to sit there and know that they won't get their shit fixed because platform holders refuse to be more reasonable in properly servicing their end user? In the end, the current setup sucks and is the opposite of where things are going. Of course, when next gen comes, they will adopt what other successful marketplaces are and have been doing.
Click to expand...

In this case the first patch is free (and it goes through MS certification as well as your QA) so theres no excuse.
 
Silly.Mikey said:
In this case the first patch is free so theres no excuse.
Click to expand...

If they failed to get their title update certified? No more help for the consumer? Is that a reasonable action for MS or any platform holder to allow to occur? I understand the argument, but it seems rather flimsy when you look at the current alternatives.
 
As shitty as the XBL patching policy is, this is clearly Konami being Konami. Ship a completely broken alpha, release a patch that does nothing, refuse to fix the game/release patch. This company deserves to go under more than anyone else right now.
 
MightyHedgehog said:
If they failed to get their title update certified? No more help for the consumer? Is that a reasonable action for MS or any platform holder to allow to occur? I understand the argument, but it seems rather flimsy when you look at the current alternatives.
Click to expand...

If your patch goes through your QA and fails at MS, then they do what they do now i guess and don't release it. Im not saying MS has it right, but to release a broken game and not fix it (and blame MS on top of that) cause it might take you 2 patches is the most ridiculous thing ive ever heard. If the patch is that bad and it got through your QA, then you got bigger problems than the 40 grand it cost you when your re-make already made millions 5-6 years ago.
 
MightyHedgehog said:
If they failed to get their title update certified? No more help for the consumer? Is that a reasonable action for MS or any platform holder to allow to occur? I understand the argument, but it seems rather flimsy when you look at the current alternatives.
Click to expand...

What's Microsoft supposed to do? The patch would be free if they issued it. Is Microsoft supposed to code the patch too?

Konami released a buggy game. It would cost them nothing but their own time to fix it, but apparently they either can't or can't afford even that.
 
What's even better is that Konami kept everyone in the dark so long about the 360 patch, now all owners are going to get at places like Gamestop for it is about $3 or $4 at least. When I traded mine in less than a month after launch, at least I was able to get about $20 for it.
 
One thing which amazes me is that no-one has actually come out and said what each of the big players charges for patches as of yet. There has to be someone on GAF with that knowledge... so how is it that it hasn't been shared yet. Couldn't be covered by an NDA could it?

I know people keep pulling one particular number out from an interview, but there's debate over that one too (that it could possibly be for multiple systems). Spill it developer GAF! ;)
 
Mileena said:
This company deserves to go under more than anyone else right now.
Click to expand...
MGS [whatever] hype will probably strike these infractions from memory because gamers are so selective and ready to forget when big pretty things are on the horizon.

Silly.Mikey said:
If your patch goes through your QA and fails at MS, then they do what they do now i guess and don't release it. Im not saying MS has it right, but to release a broken game and not fix it cause it might take you 2 patches is the most ridiculous thing ive ever heard. If the patch is that bad and it got through your QA, then you got bigger problems than the 40 grand it cost you when your re-make already made millions 5-6 years ago.
Click to expand...
But, really, isn't a couple of patches better than no help at all? The selective inflexibility of their policy seems to benefit only them, yet most of the time their consumer is helped only some of the time and even negatively affected the rest. To me, everyone wins with unlimited patches because less games would sit on shelves unsold and at the bottom of DD lists due to being left broken or subpar thanks to a lack of updatability. More sales, more revenue for everyone. The bandwidth cost is a small price to pay for having the games people, both developer and consumer, should be reasonably happy with. The reputation of the developer/publisher and the game and its sales should be the price paid by them if they take too many, too long to fix. To make it much more expensive by requiring such fees because of MS' current system in place, seems only to hurt more than help. I realize that X360 and other console OSes aren't necessarily best-suited to a more reasonable and modern approach, but it seems they're still capable of being more prioritized on the end user, their primary customer, instead of letting them suffer from these issues.
 
It's wonderful to see this series, so beloved in my heart, being treated so awfully this generation. Downpour was a brief glimmer of what may have been a gradual return-to-form, but the HD collection and all this patching bullshit (for both HD and Downpour) just screams apathy on Konami's part.
 
This thread is hilarious. Some people in here are acting like Konami can't afford the patch fee for the 360. Let's ignore for a second that there's nothing to support this claim and ponder this further.

You guys really don't think Konami can afford $40,000 to patch Silent Hill, one of the only viable franchises they have left?

mj-laughing.gif
 
Sucks that I bought this on Xbox 360 too, but I haven't played through enough to tell anything yet.

I was kind of relieved when I heard they were working on a patch so I figured at least some of the problems people were having would be fixed but I guess not. Oh well, I already planned on getting the originals anyways.
 
Draconian said:
This thread is hilarious. Some people in here are acting like Konami can't afford the patch fee for the 360.
Click to expand...
Who is saying this? The problem is that the cost becomes a sticking point that might hurt the publisher and developer, due to tarnished reputation or lowered sales of the game (which takes away from the platform holder's royalties that they would receive), but always punishes the gamers who bought it and those who want it to be better so that they will then buy it. In the case of franchise health and reputation, this does nothing but ensure a long-lasting negative mark on it, perhaps accelerating its journey into irrelevance.
 
I bought this at launch for the 360 and didnt return it because I read about the patch.

:(

Thanks Konami, ya bastards. Last time I support a game published by Konami on day 1
 
Konami has done a great job in sinking this franchise to the very bottom. Their commitment to this is more than remarkable.
 
MightyHedgehog said:
MGS [whatever] hype will probably strike these infractions from memory because gamers are so selective and ready to forget when big pretty things are on the horizon.


But, really, isn't a couple of patches better than no help at all? The selective inflexibility of their policy seems to benefit only them, yet most of the time their consumer is helped only some of the time and even negatively affected the rest. To me, everyone wins with unlimited patches because less games would sit on shelves unsold and at the bottom of DD lists due to being left broken or subpar thanks to a lack of updatability. More sales, more revenue for everyone. The bandwidth cost is a small price to pay for having the games people, both developer and consumer, should be reasonably happy with. The reputation of the developer/publisher and the game and its sales should be the price paid by them if they take too many, too long to fix. To make it much more expensive by requiring such fees because of MS' current system in place, seems only to hurt more than help. I realize that X360 and other console OSes aren't necessarily best-suited to a more reasonable and modern approach, but it seems they're still capable of being more prioritized on the end user, their primary customer, instead of letting them suffer from these issues.
Click to expand...

If this was an indie Dev id see your point and id see the problem, but this thread is about Silent Hill and this is a Konami game who already made millions off this franchise years ago, knowingly re-released it in this condition and now don't even attempt a free fix. There is no argument you can make to defend that. None.
 
Silly.Mikey said:
If this was an indie dev id see your point and id see the problem, but this thread is about Silent Hill and this is a Konami game who already made millions off this franchise years ago, knowingly re-released it in this condition and now don't even attempt a free fix. There is no argument you can make to defend that. None.
Click to expand...

I never defended it. I only question the sanity and fairness of platform holder policy when it always screws us, the customer, first and foremost.
 
-NinjaBoiX- said:
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.
Click to expand...
Wait, so the fog issues were fixed? That was like one of the bigger, if not main graphical issues right? Does that not count as a major fix in this patch, why are people saying it was insignificant?

This is also the first I hear of the team having to work with unfinished code. Pretty shitty if true.
 
PixyJunket said:
What did they do? Other than remove it, I mean.
Click to expand...

The game itself contains only 1,000 cards when there is at least 5,000 of them. The game also has the most insane, tedious way of unlocking cards that you could literally put in 500 hours into just obtaining cards and still not have 3x of the card you need, because it's completely random and only happens when you win a duel.

There's CPU battling and online, and they also reused the entire soundtrack from a PSP Yu-Gi-Oh! game. Not only that, but they released DLC which only unlocked an extremely few amount of cards(the only DLC offered), and if you purchase all of it, it still isn't enough.

In other words, they released 1/5th of typical game essentially, and it doesn't have a single player story either like they usually do.
 
MightyHedgehog said:
Who is saying this? The problem is that the cost becomes a sticking point that might hurt the publisher and developer, due to tarnished reputation or lowered sales of the game (which takes away from the platform holder's royalties that they would receive), but always punishes the gamers who bought it and those who want it to be better so that they will then buy it. In the case of franchise health and reputation, this does nothing but ensure a long-lasting negative mark on it, perhaps accelerating its journey into irrelevance.
Click to expand...

The point is that the fee itself is a red herring in this thread. I agree with your points, but this is not the thread to discuss the pros and cons of the fee when there's no evidence that this is why the patch was cancelled and it's common knowledge that Konami could easily afford such a fee anyway.
 
Konami wouldn't have even had to pay a fee anyways since your first patch is a freebee. HD Collection 360 never had a day one patch. PS3 version did.

What likely happened is they submitted the patch for cert and it failed. Konami then just trashed it.
 
There has to be a reason for a patch on one but not the other. Maybe they get charged per game in the collection and cant just put the whole thing as the 1 free patch. I don't actually know anything I am just speculating here.
 
I feel like Konami couldn't time this better.

Everyone was just yelling about Fez not getting patched again last month and now this happens and everyone will blame MS for it even though this is all on Konami.
 
I want to say fuck you konami, then I remember that no patch could fix this mess and I wouldn't have bought it anyway. Well, maybe, but not now.

And again, Downpour is a good game. Just keep having to add some defense of it.
 
First patch is free so no excuse. Any patch after that Konami must eat the costs because the game shouldn't have even released in the state it was. A few bugs here and there ok... but both versions had obvious problems right from the start. It wasn't like this was some unknown issue that popped up.

And as someone pointed out, if they have the time and money to patch a game that works perfectly fine, they have the money to patch a game that is broken.
 
Either twitter must be moving really slow today, or this is huge. Because Silent Hill HD collection is trending in the top 10 as #4.
 
Ouch sucks for 360 users. I kept my PS3 version which was a wise decision because the patch fixed everything. The fog is better, the lip sync is back in sync, and most importantly there's no more stuttering or slow mo. The streets looking so clean didn't bother me as I prefer the HD widescreen look compared to the blurred gritty look of the PS2 versions.
 
Welp, I guess I'll just start playing through this, prrrrrretty pathetic on Konami's part. Also, the people saying they shouldn't have announced this and just let it fade away, I would rather they do this and I can get angry at them now instead of waiting 3 months and getting enraged at them then.
 
Loudninja said:
I don't think I ever heard of a patch getting cancelled.
Click to expand...

Its because it costs a significant amount of money to patch the game on 360, the publishers have to pay that cost for Microsoft to even consider pushing it through.

Its happened a few times recently, with Fez in particular.
 
Grief.exe said:
Its because it costs a significant amount of money to patch the game on 360, the publishers have to pay that cost for Microsoft to even consider pushing it through.

Its happened a few times recently, with Fez in particular.
Click to expand...

It costs a significant amount to patch on any platform, considering the development time involved. Microsoft and Sony (does Nintendo charge for patches?) have an additional charge over PC patching, but it's not like it's 'free' to create patches on any platform. That's why most companies try to get it right the first time.

In any case, as has been mentioned a couple of times, the first title update on the 360 is free. There's nothing stopping Konami but Konami.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Silent Hill Transmission set for February 12 featuring Silent Hill: Townfall
News Event 
0
173
IbizaPocholo replied
Silent Hill f shipments and digital sales top two million; Silent Hill 2 Remake surpasses 6 million players
Business Game Dev Sales-Age 
13
110
Killer8 replied
Silent Hill PS1 decomped PC Port you can try
7
350
MrJangles replied
Silent Hill 2 is coming to Xbox on November 21st
2 3 4 5 6
255
4K
adamsapple replied
Akira Yamaoka is not scoring Silent Hill Townfall but is already working on the Silent Hill 1 Remake
Opinion Rumor Game Dev 
8
314
Itchy Tickles replied
Top Bottom