More patching problems on 360: Konami cancels Silent Hill HD patch on 360

DrTrafalgarLaw · 2012-08-08 05:21:01

This can't be a coincidence anymore after Phil Fish from Fez, Tim Shafer from Double Fine and in the distant past Valve and John Carmack have spoken up about the backwardass gimped way of Microsoft handling patches on their console. It's time to chemotherapy that cancer to gaming into oblivion. The patch was possible on PS3, so why not on the 360? Could it be perhaps the insane amount of costs and needlessly long certification process needed for greenlighting a patch on a 360?http://www.giantbomb.com/news/konami-not-patching-silent-hill-hd-on-xbox-360-because-well-its-hard/4320/I'll update it if anything more is said about the cause of this, allthough we pretty much all know what that is...the cancer to gaming that is called Microsoft. Lemmings sure have it hard. No games, no patches, no online gameplay. Time for Sony to hit the weak point of the GIANT ENEMY CRAB for MASSIVE DAMAGE.

This topic is locked from further discussion.

The_Game21x

26440

Forum Posts

Wiki Points

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

#401 The_Game21x

Member since 2005 • 26440 Posts

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]Oh wow, and here I thought you'd finally learned to be sensible. Guess I was wrong. tormentos

Is impossible that you are this dense... Sony charge for bandwidth,if any developer want to release a game patch they have to PAY for the bandwidth fee of 16 cents for GB,it has been like this since October 2008,by one way or another those developers payed for the patch,sony's one just wasn't a fixed price because it is bandwidth what they charge for,what is claim in the article is just that a fee.. Now sony only charge now bandwidth fees to patches that ad content,the one that fix games are free which on 360 still cost money.

You say I'm dense but you can't even read the articles you post.

"One of those evolutions is that Sony now allows developers to issue data-only patches to their games for free"

What is so hard to understand about that? Sony used to charge developers to issue these kinds of patches and now they don't. NOWHERE does it say this was a fee for bandwidth. This is a fee related to the patch itself, not the bandwidth it consumes.

So again, I'd like to see you prove that Sony never charged a similar fee for patches on the PSN like Microsoft does.

11 years ago

tormentos

33784

Forum Posts

Wiki Points

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#402 tormentos

Member since 2003 • 33784 Posts

You say I'm dense but you can't even read the articles you post.
"One of those evolutions is that Sony now allows developers to issue data-only patches to their games for free"
What is so hard to understand about that? Sony used to charge developers to issue these kinds of patches and now they don't. NOWHERE does it say this was a fee for bandwidth. This is a fee related to the patch itself, not the bandwidth it consumes.
So again, I'd like to see you prove that Sony never charged a similar fee for patches on the PSN like Microsoft does.
The_Game21x

Dude the patch was charge for but the fee was for Bandwidth what is so damn hard to understand,they use to charge for all patches,because there was a bandwidth fee which still up for some patches,but not for patches that fix games... This is coming from March is not new,because sony changed its policies,just like they change them on October 2008 when they add the fee.. Now patches that fix games are free,and the rest continue to pay bandwidth fees just like everything on PSN,hope you get it this time.

11 years ago

delta3074

20003

Forum Posts

Wiki Points

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#403 delta3074

Member since 2007 • 20003 Posts

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="delta3074"]'He claimed that, while Sony still charges developers fees for game updates and patches, the company had become more lenient in recent years, particularly with regards to introducing freemium model options to studios.' http://www.computerandvideogames.com/361054/sony-pledges-to-further-open-ps3-for-developers/# That wasn't hard,lol Posted on Wednesday 1-Aug-2012 3:14 PM BST

The fee is for the bandwidth they consume. Which is what developer cry for on 2009,because before October 2008 there was no fee what so ever for patches,is the reason why finding a like of sony charging for patches is close to impossible. Also that article basically talks about things put in motion by sony for months,in fact one of the articles i read is from march. ""Sony hopes to lure developers away from Steam, smartphones and Xbox Live Arcade by embracing new business models and offering greater freedom, so says incoming PlayStation Digital Platforms boss Jack Buser. "" In a thinly veiled jibe at Microsoft's tightly-controlled Xbox Live Arcade service, Buser added that PlayStation Network is now offering developers freedom to release their games on their own terms. "We're really opening up a lot of our policies beyond what you're going to see with other online game platforms," he revealed. "I think one of the most significant things we do on PSN that isn't really talked about a lot in the consumer press is the notion that game developers - specifically independent game developers - are able to publish their own games on PSN. "If you look at some of our competition they actually force independent developers to go and find big publishers that eat into the money that they would otherwise make, which to us seems crazy. If someone wants to make a great game and publish it themselves then let them do it."" http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-03-07-new-psn-boss-were-doing-whats-right-for-the-gamer All this was before the whole Fez crap exploded on MS face,but what is new sony policies had always been more open than MS and several PC developers had go on record for that,MS want to win it all,and want to charge for all that is the way on 360.. But even if sony some out charge for patches like MS do to even fix a game,can we actually blame sony.? MS charge you $60 dollars a year times 20 million how much is that.? Sony doesn't charge a cent for PSN,so if they in deed charge developers is a million times better,and at least has even a small % of justification,not to mention the xbox 360 dash is full of ads,way more than PSN which is a free service.

it CLEARLY states UPDATES and PATCHES and my article was posted on the 1st of AUGUST THIS YEAR, check the date the article was posted dude because you are getting beyond rediculous now, i copy pasted the date it was posted into my last post,, The article i posted clearly states that SONY charges for patch's and updates you said there where no links that stated that, you are doing that incredibly stupid, immature thing of standing by what you are saying after you have been proved wrong multiple times, like you said earlier 'all patches are Data' Really? if that was the case then why does the Phrase Data-only patches even exist, surely they would be called just patches no?

11 years ago

WilliamRLBaker

28915

Forum Posts

Wiki Points

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#404 WilliamRLBaker

Member since 2006 • 28915 Posts

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]You say I'm dense but you can't even read the articles you post.
"One of those evolutions is that Sony now allows developers to issue data-only patches to their games for free"
What is so hard to understand about that? Sony used to charge developers to issue these kinds of patches and now they don't. NOWHERE does it say this was a fee for bandwidth. This is a fee related to the patch itself, not the bandwidth it consumes.
So again, I'd like to see you prove that Sony never charged a similar fee for patches on the PSN like Microsoft does.
tormentos

no where does it say patches that fix games are free it says data only patches and guess what numbnuts by definition a patch is something that fixes something.

11 years ago

The Best-Reviewed Games Of 2023

Best VR Headsets In 2023

Move topic to another board