Herbspiceguy
Member
Expecting something like this.
-
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
Expecting something like this.
righthandmouse
Banned
What would be the incentive as a developer to make a patch for the pro if they're going to be charged for it? Anyone have a Russian translation?
User 479360
Banned
F-f-f-fuck that.
I won't be updating old titles then.
I won't be updating old titles then.
That's my thinking, which is why I created this thread.
Droog
Member
Wow, that's generous if so. Certification used to cost quite a lot and I'm sure the platform holders used to make a fair bit of cash that way. I guess they recoup costs in other areas these days...
wesleyshark
Banned
Sony charges its own first party devs for patches... Wat
xion4360
Member
Then that would be DLC not a Patch. There is no way that any game would have the pro mode patched in any way that would require payment outside of you buying a ps4 pro. the ps4 pro is not allowed to give you features not available to all ps4 users outside of visual enhancements and that is just not something you pay for.
Primethius
Banned
Hopefully it's a communinication mistake cause fuck that noise.
wesleyshark
Banned
That's why they hiked the price
This sounds like he's referring to the cost to the DEVELOPERS, not the PLAYERS. That said, I thought Sony removed the cost for developer updates/patches in some situations?
I remember, years ago, there was a damning article about MS where smaller devs couldn't afford to patch their own game after an unforeseen glitch passed certification. I think after that, a game's first patch was complimentary on MS systems.
Charging players for taking advantage of a hardware boost they already paid for is atrocious. If there's no patch on a certain game, allow people to specify what clock speed to run it on, instead of forcing stock-PS4 specs (if the downclocking thing is confirmed).
I remember, years ago, there was a damning article about MS where smaller devs couldn't afford to patch their own game after an unforeseen glitch passed certification. I think after that, a game's first patch was complimentary on MS systems.
Charging players for taking advantage of a hardware boost they already paid for is atrocious. If there's no patch on a certain game, allow people to specify what clock speed to run it on, instead of forcing stock-PS4 specs (if the downclocking thing is confirmed).
Hip Hop
Member
Is it?
Why would it vary that they will charge internal first party studios? It is their studios.
Makes no sense.
It makes more sense that it seems they will ask for a fee from players depending on the title.
Already got me. The tittle is an attention grabber.
I'm sorry, I looked at the leaked documentation again and there's nothing that would specifically prevent charging for patches.
http://img.expreview.com/news/2016/07/15/312585554-PS4-5-NEO-pdf.pdf
There's this:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...ion-4k-neo-and-the-original-ps4-will-co-exist
The bit about "no extra costs associated in running titles on a different console."
Of course we could now hyper analyse that and start splitting hairs over whether that means 'just running' or 'running with enhancements also'.
In any event, patches are only relevant to legacy games, pre-Oct. Any new games are not being patched for Pro, and cannot be patched with a Pro-mode after the fact, so even if patches were chargeable, it wouldn't be something that affects games going forward. But I really don't think it is intended to allow charges on patches for older games...
Patches cost money anyway (cost of labour). The added fee is for certification, and slightly as a deterrent to release broken games. Developers would either patch games in hope to get more revenue of a released title, get experience with new technical solutions or create goodwill for upcoming titles.
People saying that we don't understand. Look at the question and answer again.
The response from Ito insinuates that a fee will be down to the discretion of the licensee. I.E the developerpublisher
If there was a set fee for developers, then it wouldn't change "just because".
.
The response from Ito insinuates that a fee will be down to the discretion of the licensee. I.E the developerpublisher
If there was a set fee for developers, then it wouldn't change "just because".
hemo memo
Gold Member
Cost money to publishers/developers, then publishers/developers try to find a way to make the end user pay. Just like always.
Yaphett Kotto
Member
This is most likely the cost publishers have to pay, not the consumer. Publishers had to pay for patches before during the PS360 era.
Iced Arcade
Member
has to be mistranslation.
grandwizard
Member
Then why is he talking about some games having a fee and some not when referring to Sony Interactive games? They wouldn't be charging themselves for patches.
YianGaruga
Banned
The interview makes even less sense if it was about costs to the devs. It's definitely not that.
That say it depends on the thinking of the licensee (the dev) and some SIE games will cost and some wont. Makes no sense at all
That say it depends on the thinking of the licensee (the dev) and some SIE games will cost and some wont. Makes no sense at all
Kenzodielocke
Banned
How long will it take Sony to clarify on this ?
Yeah, we got horse armour, then buy this to be more powerful in the game, but I really think he means developers/publishers..
Yeah, I agree on that.
Yeah, we got horse armour, then buy this to be more powerful in the game, but I really think he means developers/publishers..
Yeah, I agree on that.
JigglesBunny
Banned
There's definitely some miscommunication here, there is no way Sony would think to charge for that sort of thing. The messaging around the Pro is Xbox One pre-launch-tier anyways and has put people off, this sort of news would be a killing blow.
I just don't see this happening, fortunately.
I just don't see this happening, fortunately.
Of course it's not about developers. In that context why would they ask if Sony charges themselves to patch their games lol.
And people on this thread have the audacity to say some of us aren't reading the first post correctly lol.
The fact Ito explicitly says it's to the dsicretion of the Licensee says it all. If it was a question with regards to the cost developers face then that would be a fixed cost and apply to everyone.
lowhighkang_LHK
Member
Because it's your game. Improving it via visuals and or performance makes your title more appealing. Gives people a reason to play it again. Maybe then buy DLC. Gives incentive for people to go out and buy a game to see how (let's say) AC Unity looks on 4k.
It gives life back to your game / franchise. Which translates into exposure, which translates into revenue. That's why.
xion4360
Member
If you charge for anything that is considered content and you cant have anything available on Neo but not on standard ps4. the visual enhancements are specifically being called patches because they come free and not as DLC.
Yangshouwen
Banned
Talk about self-destruct.
This whole PS4 Pro console is an absolute mess. Totally unnecessary. Should have waited to push the PS5 in a few years.
This whole PS4 Pro console is an absolute mess. Totally unnecessary. Should have waited to push the PS5 in a few years.
I've updated the OP to make clear that in the suggested situation it's only for games released before October.
Yes. But why have SIE charge SIE to implement a patch? And then have that vary from title by title.
YianGaruga
Banned
which already means revenue for Sony as well, as they get a cut from everything. They don't need to charge them extra for it and disincentivise devs
Can totally see a charge for "pro dlc"... I mean, people have voted with their wallets, they're willing to pay for remasters. If they're gonna spend time\resources to release a pro patch, the I'm sure they're gonna try to charge for it if they can. Whether sony actually blocks it is another thing.
jmaine_ph
Member
Because that's what people gravitate towards.
Sony doesn't know what to do with their money.
Then you're only looking for the bad news. There's been plenty of positive news from the people that have seen it in action.
YianGaruga
Banned
most people are doubting it and are critical of the source though
brokenbeans
Banned
Watch them say that this was never really on the cards but a month later the price of a games goes up by 10-20%
To 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. Both Sony and MS should take a hint from Apple on how to convey the power difference. The internet hype train will take care of the rest.
old manatee
Banned
Maybe No Man's Sky will have a paid patch that adds multiplayer.
- Status