I think that's what it is. But we need some confirmation.
-
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
CassidyIzABeast
Member
Has to be a misinterpretation. If you think I'm gonna pay $60 for a game and then pay another 5-10 dollars just to see get Pro/Scorpio version you can suck my balls through my drawls. I say that respectfully.
Fatal Error
Neo Member
isn't Konami doing this with MGSV: definitive edition and only this version that gets the 4K?
And others don't know how quick to jump ship, and board the shit post train.
I also think most people don't believe it's true. It can't be.
If it turns out to be true, hopefully we'll know once a clear and concise question and answer is given, then this will really cause a backlash for Sony, regardless of how well the PS4 has done.
Even if it is only for currently released games, the fact that some developers could charge for patches would cause the biggest meltdown towards the Pro console.
I just don't believe it's real, but then again do you remember the first thread regarding lack of 4k blu-ray player? People were saying it wasn't true too, and were questioning the source (tweet from StuffTv).....
YianGaruga
Banned
Apple refreshes their shit every year and they don't have this problem
This is people making up answers because they don't know what's actually happening because Sony didn't make sure to give some clear communication guidelines
MysticDistance
Banned
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)
EDIT: Polished up the translation a bit.
EDIT 2: Fixed the very last line. And, that's about it.
Original GameWatch Interview Section said:
Translation said:
EDIT: Polished up the translation a bit.
EDIT 2: Fixed the very last line. And, that's about it.
xion4360
Member
If its being released late october or later then its simply mandated to have pro support in some way. Day 1 or patch.
CrazedProfessional
Member
I mean isn't charging money for a new machine enough? What is going on at SCE? It's just Vita level arrogance.
No. It's because Sony has done the shittiest of jobs with the messaging and they're allowing the bad news to stick. The same thing happened with the Xbox One launch despite the fact that it had a lot of really good features. If you don't control the messaging and start confusing people, all the bad news become prominent.
This whole PS4 Pro thing just seems poorly thought out. I'm sure there are people that will pay, but I cannot think of a single person I know who would be cool paying more money for a patch just to make a game they completed slightly prettier.
Digital Foundry confirmed TLOU runs at native 4K/30fps on PS4 Pro.
Hmm. I can see this being used as a means to justify the added time/effort needed to patch older games for PS4 pro. This still feels oddly punishing. Both for the early adopters, and for the developers who have been forced into this poorly thought out idea and console.
I sincerely can't think of a reason to get a PS4 Pro. At least not now. Unless people have a lot of money to spend. Then again, people with a lot of money aren't the ones that need convincing. Sony has to convince people who've bought a PS4 already to scrounge up the dollars needed for an upgraded PS4 Pro that still continues to struggle with having a library of games. Though it looks like starting this fall it'll begin getting more and more games.
I sincerely can't think of a reason to get a PS4 Pro. At least not now. Unless people have a lot of money to spend. Then again, people with a lot of money aren't the ones that need convincing. Sony has to convince people who've bought a PS4 already to scrounge up the dollars needed for an upgraded PS4 Pro that still continues to struggle with having a library of games. Though it looks like starting this fall it'll begin getting more and more games.
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.)
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.
PLASTICA-MAN
Member
What the? This is enough if this is true.
CrazedProfessional
Member
This is what happens when a gaming company thinks they are above the purchasing power of the consumer.
lowhighkang_LHK
Member
In actuality, whether or not this is referring to the publishers or the end user is a wash.
Publishers who have released games before October are not being forced to create a Pro mode. And we know it costs money / R & D to add in HDR and add in all those extra pixels for the higher resolution.
If there is no financial return for a developer, I'd imagine most developers not doing a Pro mode. What benefit is there to them? Unless it's a semi-recent game that can benefit from the re-exposure.
But if publishers were allowed to charge us for a Neo mode, they would be more likely to spend the time and money doing a Neo mode for their, let's face it now irrelevant game. And of course, us consumers would say, "fuck that noise" and we're back at square 1.
What's ultimately far more important, is that the inclusion of a Pro mode will be mandatory and free of charge to all games released post October.
And of course, if this charge is referring to the publisher, than all of the above doesn't
matter.
Ultimately, I don't think many publishers are going to spend the money developing a PRO patch on their already irrelevant game that's been out for years. If they are allowed to charge for it, the odds of them doing it increases. But also it's unlikely consumers are going to pay for it. And publishers know this, so again - they aren't going to spend the money on a PRO patch.
Publishers who have released games before October are not being forced to create a Pro mode. And we know it costs money / R & D to add in HDR and add in all those extra pixels for the higher resolution.
If there is no financial return for a developer, I'd imagine most developers not doing a Pro mode. What benefit is there to them? Unless it's a semi-recent game that can benefit from the re-exposure.
But if publishers were allowed to charge us for a Neo mode, they would be more likely to spend the time and money doing a Neo mode for their, let's face it now irrelevant game. And of course, us consumers would say, "fuck that noise" and we're back at square 1.
What's ultimately far more important, is that the inclusion of a Pro mode will be mandatory and free of charge to all games released post October.
And of course, if this charge is referring to the publisher, than all of the above doesn't
matter.
Ultimately, I don't think many publishers are going to spend the money developing a PRO patch on their already irrelevant game that's been out for years. If they are allowed to charge for it, the odds of them doing it increases. But also it's unlikely consumers are going to pay for it. And publishers know this, so again - they aren't going to spend the money on a PRO patch.
SensibleSucker
Member
In Sony's defence, people going mad because of what is likely a mistranslation of a foreign language interview is more an indictment of modern social media than Sony. Things just move too fast and people expect instant clarification on things.
That said, this is the world we live in and, particularly during a product launch, Sony should be paying people to trawl Gaf, reddit and other fora to stamp out miscommunication/interpretation immediately. This early period is just too critical.
Even if this turns out to be nothing, it FEELS like a mistake on Sony's part and perception is everything. For example, there's no escaping the fact that the 4 Pro is over 3 times more powerful than the Xbox One S. But lots of the public (and prominent media e.g. PS I Love You XOXO) came away feeling like the Xbox One S is the same as the PS4 Pro...or even better in some ways.
That said, this is the world we live in and, particularly during a product launch, Sony should be paying people to trawl Gaf, reddit and other fora to stamp out miscommunication/interpretation immediately. This early period is just too critical.
Even if this turns out to be nothing, it FEELS like a mistake on Sony's part and perception is everything. For example, there's no escaping the fact that the 4 Pro is over 3 times more powerful than the Xbox One S. But lots of the public (and prominent media e.g. PS I Love You XOXO) came away feeling like the Xbox One S is the same as the PS4 Pro...or even better in some ways.
spazimoose
Member
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.
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.
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)
Fully expecting something like "Witcher 3 PS4 Pro Patch - Now allows for 1080p60 / 4K* 60fps and other graphical improvements for PS4 Pro / $5.99. *Actually 4Kpr"
The launch patches will probably be free as an incentive, and all new titles will be at no added cost, but aside from some evergreen titles like GTAV (although I bet people would be willing to pay for a good "Pro GTA V" patch), I don't really expect many free PS4P patches for old titles (a few probably, perhaps trying to get the title back in active sales)
test_account
XP-39C²
Seems more like this is what happends when theres misunderstanding involved
wesleyshark
Banned
Hahaha
If the updated translation is anything to go by then it seems to be a completely inaccurate translation and they're saying that they'll paying some developers to do the patches but not others. Probably just for the higher profile games.
I don't speak the language though, it's not my translation.
So maybe they are talking about certification costs, not cost for the user?
If Nintendo can charge a fee to essentially load a static ROM file in one emulator instead of another, Sony would be stupid to not capitalize on the market's willingness to pointlessly empty their pockets.
I was wondering what the next de-evolution would be after ARK's early access paid expansion, and I think I've found my answer: Paid patches
I was wondering what the next de-evolution would be after ARK's early access paid expansion, and I think I've found my answer: Paid patches
CrazedProfessional
Member
Why must Sony insist on ruining their marketshare?
What does that have to do with devs paying for a patch?
Fatal Error
Neo Member
so basically if you want the 4K you have to buy the new edition for 50$.
xion4360
Member
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. The fact that it may require additional work to a completed game is why its optional for the backlog.
If the original doesnt get patched.
There wont be patches for games releasing in the future because they will have already accounted for ps4 pro in the development cycle.
Most? Most replies I see in this thread are just impulse drive-bys. This has nothing to do with end users.
test_account
XP-39C²
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.
Ruining with what?
Most old titles will not get a patch unless publishers\devs can get something back for it. I doubt those old titles will sell enough to make up for the extra cost. Personally I wouldn't mind paying a small fee for a patch on some older ps4 titles to get improvements.
Memorabilia
Member
De-incentivize devs from releasing Pro patches for existing games by charging a fee? WTF? I can't believe this is true, but if so its absolutely retarded as Pro patches for existing games is the primary (only?) good motivator for existing PS4 owners who have 1080p TVs to upgrade to the Pro. Between the lackluster sales pitch, the exclusion of a UHD drive and Lincoln's arrogant/tone-deaf response to criticism and now this, it appears Sony's PR dept is trying to see if they can pull a Microsoft. Baffling.
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.
righthandmouse
Banned
I hope there's only a few of you out there.
Didn't you get the memo?
Arrogant Sony is back.
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.
Not my translation but that's what it says.
MysticDistance
Banned
Polished it up a bit. It really does sound like Masayasu Ito is saying that depending on each title and each licensee/third-party, some will cost a fee to make, but will be free, or that some third-parties can choose to attach a fee for a while.
I have no idea where it being paid came from. Someone at Kotaku either got confused or something, because all of them being paid is not said once in the entire interview.
Basically, it depends on the developer. Some third-parties may choose to make it paid and later free, and some will be free off the bat.
CrazedProfessional
Member
This interview is designed to test the market. I believe Sony is actively releasing mixed messaged PR to see how deep these wallets are.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Did you pay the developers and artists and QA's in the teams spending work hours to produce and test the content for the Pro mode too?
I can understand that it would be really bad PR, but someone that wanted to push this evergreen super dreamy propaganda of forward compatible iterative consoles probably made people believe that all developers would put in quite a bit of work to produce 4K mode content and improved 1080p visuals...
Edit: I am not advocating for such patches not to be free to end users, especially if the developers do very little work on them.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
LOL!!! Nah man. Not going to happen.
That doesn't make sense to me at all.
Every patch costs money. The 4K and HDR feature doesn't just sneak inside a game on its own. It always requires a resource to spend time on it. And that resource costs money over a given period.
I don't read it the way you do, because it's never free even if Insomniac said it costs one man-month to implement HDR which is relatively little compared to a full game or DLC. (Unless we're talking some skin or so.)
- Status