-
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.
Washington Post: Sony and Nintendo are not in-step with how the rest of the software industry works
- Thread starter ManaByte
- Start date
PaintTinJr
Member
That's an interesting take on the bit that I've put in bold (IMHO), from who's perspective are they not drastically different?
Let's take a hypothetical that most of Sony's games getting the cross-gen with PS5 native upgrade use UE.
Surely the deal PlayStation had with Epic to use UE4 on the PS4 is to target the PS4 GCN based SDK, and when a PS4 game runs on PS5 as a basic PS4/Pro game, it is using UE4 code with GCN running in PS4 compatibility mode of the PS5.
Surely from that situation, it would be reasonable to assume that PlayStation has a new deal with Epic for UE, and that whether it is UE4 or UE5 mostly using UE4 carried over features, UE has been updated to use PlayStation's new PS5 custom RDNA2 SDK, no?
So Sony may genuinely be paying for both UE4 and UE5 middleware licensing to deliver a PS4 game and a native PS5 version of the same game.
I would guess that any game that doesn't go to 2-3sec loading on PS5 is just using a modified version of UE4 to access some of RDNA2 capabilities via a dev work arounds to directly call the PS5 sdk functions, but isn't really a native app using the sdk integrated in the updated UE product. Even now, I'm not convinced that Final Fantasy vii remake on PS5 is a native PS5 app under the hood.
edit: Given the way developers don't have direct access to XsS and XsX hardware, and run through a wrapper - like a JVM - that Xbox improves continually after profiling - would possibly mean that sticking with UE4 for cross-gen with smartdelivery would be fine, because Xbox is responsible for how UE4 interfaces with that wrapper.
Last edited:
MarkMe2525
Member
Is everyone going to be OK spending $80 on PS6 titles? If not, you have to nip this in the bud now.
Maxwell Jacob Friedman
leads to fear. Fear leads to xbox.
You're right, however they are the two companies that are constantly bringing out quality games and bangers and Id gladly pay whatever fee I would need to to play quality and not quantity how xbox is doing
Last edited:
Tripolygon
Banned
Its really freaking obvious. People are conflating two different things.
Lets break down the article.
Going from old generation device iPhone X to iPhone 12
This implies you have to pay to play games you bought on PS4 on your PS5. You don't you can run that same game you bought for your PS4 on PS5, with some performance and resolution uplifts. Sony has gone back and patched some of their games to increase FPS too.
Going from old gen Xbox One to Series X
On PS5 there is dumb delivery, all Multiplatform cross gen games that offers free upgrade for next gen also get free PS5 SKU just like it is on Xbox Series X. The difference is that Sony doesn't offer all their own games as free upgrade, only some. Microsoft committed to offering free upgrade for their cross gen games.
I wish people would get their issues right. What they seem to have issues with is Sony has not committed to offering all their cross gen games as free upgrade. They had arbitrary charge which has now been standardized to $10 upgrade path.
Last edited:
GHG
Member
Of course it doesn't. Publishers can still do whatever the fuck they want and are doing so. I'd expect "smart delivery" to apply to all Xbox games studios games and Microsoft should be commended if they follow through on the promise for the duration of the generation, but people throwing the term "smart delivery" around like it applies to all games on the platform are being disingenuous and they know it (it's not the only area where they are being disingenuous but I've already addressed that in my previous post in this thread). Facts are not important just feelings and marketing buzzwords.
For shits and giggles Sony should implement their $10 "next gen upgrade" policy on the Xbox for the next MLB. I'd like to see how smart delivery will save that situation.
Yep but they aren't still trying to fully cash in AGAIN. They are merely just trying to fully cash in.
You might think MK8 sold great on the Wii U with ~8.5 million copies sold but NIntendo doesn't think that because they know they sold 20-30 million copies of MK on past systems. They also know the game was well received on the Wii U.
That's why we saw a rerelease. Without the relatively low sales but otherwise good reception it wouldn't have happened. That high attach rate on a low install base led to rereleases. It also helps that the Switch is the first time MK8 and other Wii U games are playable on a true handheld and in many cases they include the DLC with the Switch version.
I've seen 3rd party games released on one system and then, a few years later, ported to other systems because the publishers feels they left sales on the table. I guess usually that is part of being an exclusive. But the reasons for later porting to other systems is still to fully realize the game's potential sales.
Also have seen plenty of full priced X1/Ps4 ports to the Switch. I don't think the leap from Wii U to Switch was really any easier than X1/PS4 to Switch. Did those developers offer any discount of any kind to owners of the game on the X1 or PS4?
Yes it would have been nice to get some discount on Switch versions of a game that you bought digitally on the Wii U. I don't think Nintendo is setup to do that and I think just made the call to not to do the work to make that happen. They aren't against doing nice things for their customers. CAse in point, some of the Wii U games ported to the Switch were given away for free on the Wii U as rewards to (iirc) early Wii U adopters. I received at least 4 $50 digital Wii U games for free including Pikmin 3 and Donkey Kong. Also got a bunch of VC games for free.
Last edited:
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
the game is still in development for both platforms. Its really not
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
Sony can make it the same case though. Like Microsoft. Sony just don’t want to because they prefer to charge money from players.
daveonezero
Banned
I’m sorry but Nintendo has been “dead” ever since the N64.
I don’t think Washington Post is as knowledgeable about the gaming industry as Nintendo.
I also think Song and PlayStation are doing fine.
I don’t think Washington Post is as knowledgeable about the gaming industry as Nintendo.
I also think Song and PlayStation are doing fine.
ReBurn
Gold Member
If they're making people who already bought the game buy it again instead of letting them play the copy they already bought then they are looking to cash in again. Whether it's "fully" or not is just semantics, really. The bottom line is they're making people rebuy something they already bought if they want to play it on the new console.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
At the end of the day, paid upgrades in gaming (for nominal incremental boosts) really comes down to what kind of person you are, and if like to compare it against other companies or scenarios (like the poster a day or two ago saying If you buy an iPhone 11, should people get an iPhone 12 for free?).
It's your money.
Some people bought $15 map packs for COD back in the day (I did it a lot up to MW3). Some people said forget it and stuck to the game's 12 maps that come with each game (every game after MW3).
BUT, one thing that will hold true in business is voting with your wallet works. If the general public eats it up, it'll continue. If they cry foul, the company will usually backtrack (as seen by Sony and Horizon's free upgrade debacle after what? 48 hours? They backtracked so fast they issued the change on Labour Day weekend Saturday night).
Horizon was backtracked. But Sony now is stating future games at $10 upgrades. You can be a supporter or denier of $10. If you are a denier, you better speak up or else it'll go through as accepted. If you are a supporter and want it to continue, you dont really have to do anything as it's already the plan. But if you want to prevent another 180 backtrack and think paying Sony an extra $10 is good for gaming, then convince the forum it's good for gamers.
It's your money.
Some people bought $15 map packs for COD back in the day (I did it a lot up to MW3). Some people said forget it and stuck to the game's 12 maps that come with each game (every game after MW3).
BUT, one thing that will hold true in business is voting with your wallet works. If the general public eats it up, it'll continue. If they cry foul, the company will usually backtrack (as seen by Sony and Horizon's free upgrade debacle after what? 48 hours? They backtracked so fast they issued the change on Labour Day weekend Saturday night).
Horizon was backtracked. But Sony now is stating future games at $10 upgrades. You can be a supporter or denier of $10. If you are a denier, you better speak up or else it'll go through as accepted. If you are a supporter and want it to continue, you dont really have to do anything as it's already the plan. But if you want to prevent another 180 backtrack and think paying Sony an extra $10 is good for gaming, then convince the forum it's good for gamers.
Last edited:
All in all it doesn't matter: the industry is going to die with those practices for a simple reason: there will always be more offer than demand.
I'm having trouble finding someone who has a PS5 when almost everybody either had a PS4, more rarely a XBO, or more recently a switch. The few who do have a PS5 or a Switch are not using it anymore, both because there aren't many new games worth it but also because it's way too fucking expensive to invest in secondary products.
Yet whether they have a PC, a Mac or a mobile they're regularly playing video games, lots of them "hacking" them. So yes prices and practices do matter, and if they want to continue resting on the fewer and fewer people who will rack-in 70€ for an MLB or multiplatform FPS game, they'll end-up losing period.
I'm having trouble finding someone who has a PS5 when almost everybody either had a PS4, more rarely a XBO, or more recently a switch. The few who do have a PS5 or a Switch are not using it anymore, both because there aren't many new games worth it but also because it's way too fucking expensive to invest in secondary products.
Yet whether they have a PC, a Mac or a mobile they're regularly playing video games, lots of them "hacking" them. So yes prices and practices do matter, and if they want to continue resting on the fewer and fewer people who will rack-in 70€ for an MLB or multiplatform FPS game, they'll end-up losing period.
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
No that's called backwards compatibility, you're still playing the same game you paid for, nothing has been altered
If it's better on that hardware it's because it was always capable of being played at the spec.
But what people are comparing it to is like the free Next-Gen BC updates.
But they're applying that free privilege to a complete recode of a game for a new platform.
Something that requires the development team going back into development and rebuilding the game for a different system.
And obviously they need to be paid for that.
Well in reality they do, some people think they should do it for free
You know the saying
"give them an inch, and they'll take a mile"
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
DLSS and RT is a new thing lately for PC gaming. When a dev does an update giving PC gamers new graphics settings, do they charge PC gamers an extra $10 for the download?No that's called backwards compatibility, you're still playing the same game you paid for, nothing has been altered
If it's better on that hardware it's because it was always capable of being played at the spec.
But what people are comparing it to is like the free Next-Gen BC updates.
But they're applying that free privilege to a complete recode of a game for a new platform.
Something that requires the development team going back into development and rebuilding the game for a different system.
And obviously they need to be paid for that.
Well in reality they do, some people think they should do it for free
You know the saying
"give them an inch, and they'll take a mile"
Even ignoring DLSS/RT, does a PC dev charge different prices for different settings, since it takes more work for ultra settings?
MrFunSocks
Banned
Doesn't really mean much when they're both raking in record profits and fighting it out for number 1 selling console does it?
Consumers have shown that they'll make excuses for their favourite plastic toy company not doing things it should or charging for things it shouldn't, and that's all that matters unfortunately. Why would Sony or Nintendo change to follow the software industry when they make far more money doing what they do? They'd be stupid to. They're not your friends, they're for profit companies.
Consumers have shown that they'll make excuses for their favourite plastic toy company not doing things it should or charging for things it shouldn't, and that's all that matters unfortunately. Why would Sony or Nintendo change to follow the software industry when they make far more money doing what they do? They'd be stupid to. They're not your friends, they're for profit companies.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Well said.
I said this somewhere a day or two ago, but just to show how weird gamers can be they are the first to criticize game companies for cookie cutter games "it's the same shit guys, but a bit better looking", buggy games, getting too big, etc.... Gamers are also a crowd that love a good deal, getting games for cheap as possible and trying to maximize money by trading games back or selling them on eBay. Even scraping back $20 is worth doing.
But then:
1. Support the digital move by buying higher digital prices, where convenience seems to trump all tossing in the garbage all those anti-digital rhetoric from way back
2. Some support higher prices and upgrade fees to help their corporate coffers when the norm lately is mostly digital upgrades are free. The entire PS4 Pro and One X mini-era were boosted games and zero upgrade fees, yet I didnt see one person say Sony or MS should charge gamers $10 for these boosts
Last edited:
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
Unbelievably I agree.
I think people are forgetting before this gen you HAD to buy a port of old game for your new console.
Those companies are in it to make money,
They have a version of a product, you want it.
Cough up the money.
it's pretty shocking that there is $10 upgrade anything.
Let alone a free upgrade.
Like I said, "give them a inch and they'll take mile" and I mean consumers when I say this.
But they can easily take it away, they don't have to give any entitlements, especially when it only causes complaint's when they don't offer it.
ZywyPL
Banned
That's not an argument at all, because has anything changed in the games themselves at the same time? If anything, the games nowadays offer much less than when they were priced 60$ all those years ago, or even earlier when they used to cost 50. So if paying more for less is for you a "false concern" then like I said, you do you, support this crap if you firmly believe those companies will bankrupt if you don't but those overpriced games on day one, and then double/tripple dip later on.
6502
Member
Nintendo gave us backwards compatibility with gc/wii/wii u the change in architecture obviates expectations on switch.
I agree free things are nice, but anyone who has glanced at the industry for longer than 30 seconds realise that this is by choice or as a consequence of design.
I doubt many competitor businesses are looking at Sony and Nintendo and laughing for not giving stuff away.
That is not to excuse the shit online or rom pack disks, but it is business at the end of the day. Corporations are not our friends or loving family members. People expecting any different need to grow up.
I don't like it so I don't give them my cash. That is how consumers change things - not whinging online while preordering the next ripoff.
I agree free things are nice, but anyone who has glanced at the industry for longer than 30 seconds realise that this is by choice or as a consequence of design.
I doubt many competitor businesses are looking at Sony and Nintendo and laughing for not giving stuff away.
That is not to excuse the shit online or rom pack disks, but it is business at the end of the day. Corporations are not our friends or loving family members. People expecting any different need to grow up.
I don't like it so I don't give them my cash. That is how consumers change things - not whinging online while preordering the next ripoff.
Stare-Bear
Banned
I think Nintendo is way worse than Sony with their $10 upgrade fee. That compilation of ROMS called Super Mario 3D All Stars that Nintendo charged full price for was the most blatant cash grab in the history of video gaming.
KingT731
Member
And that's the thing. It's easy to see value when you aren't buying games. On the same coin you see less value in the individual games because for that $15/m you have access to a buffet of sorts.
Not to mention the marketing behind it. "We have a limited number of copies!" Triggering that FOMO lol
Last edited:
That's because of sony's price structure. They have also upped license fees, so selling a PS5 game is more expensive because of that. But with the "free upgrade" they sell you the PS4 game (less fees) and also give you the PS5 game "for free" (no fees).
On xbox it is more like on PC. If you have the game on xbox one, it is the same game than on series s/x just with addition libraries to use. Sony could have done the same by just adding a PS5 profile to the BC mode. Than more BC titles could have get much better upgrades. But they wanted to abandom the "old" APIs and deliver a new one, which is on the long run much less work for them. MS decided they use one API for all (with different feature levels), just like on PC. This makes things a bit more complicated for MS (because of compatibility etc) but makes the transition much easier.
Both things have advantages and disadvantages.
E.g. it would be no problem for MS to introduce new hardware (from a compatibility perspective) while sony than (with the next gen) might just drop PS4 compatibility.
But where Sony and Nintendo are really behind is cloud saves. Even on gog savesgames are already automatically synced with the cloud.
Last edited:
KingT731
Member
Cerny already said during the PS5 presentation that the PS4 logic on the chip. There's no dropping PS4 compatability. It's not separate hardware like how the PS2/OG PS3 BC worked.
I am with you, I don't think they will drop BC support.Cerny already said during the PS5 presentation that the PS4 logic on the chip. There's no dropping PS4 compatability. It's not separate hardware like how the PS2/OG PS3 BC worked.
I think that you will start seeing some bigger differences in the uplifts between the ps4 and ps6 and xbox one and the xbox series x (2023/4). I don't know if anyone cares though.
Marvel14
Banned
Pray silence for all those in the 80s and 90s who paid $50 -$60 or the equivalent of $100+ today for each videogame....those were hard and unforgiving times.
KingT731
Member
That's the "issue" currently that game development is still based on last gen hardware which is why you keep seeing the "looks like an upscaled PS4/XB1 game" narrative. Engines need to be updated and all that jazz. So yeah I agree with you and based on previous gens years 2-3 are where it gets interesting.
Support in hardware is one thing. But it is another thing to support the APIs/SDKs. E.g. PS4 games use specific libraries to access playstation network. Those must be maintained (bugfixes, security, ...). And at some point they might even use a whole other infrastructure with a new api. So at some point they will drop the support because they don't want to maintain different libraries for different APIs. Backwardscompatibility can get really tricky over time, especially in a fast changing business (cloud-services).Cerny already said during the PS5 presentation that the PS4 logic on the chip. There's no dropping PS4 compatability. It's not separate hardware like how the PS2/OG PS3 BC worked.
Like I wrote, there are always advantages and disadvantages with the decisions made. Maintainence is one of those things that can lead to dropping something before it get's to much work (or even a risk). A new API for the new model has the advantage that developers will adopt the new technologies faster while getting rid of some things that might not have been so good in the past.
MarkMe2525
Member
I was there paying it. The prices were set in a time we're cartridges had to be accounted for which ate into half of the profits. The market is also 3 times as big today as it was in the past. I have no sympathy for the trials and tribulations of Sony/activivision/EA and their profit margins.
There is an upper limit on what I'm willing to pay for a software license.
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
I will certainly love to pay $100 for PS6 games
BlackTron
Member
Different "coding method"? Uh...
Come on. It's all the exact same code with some graphics sliders moved and maybe a less compressed texture pack. In other words, taking what Smart Delivery does automatically and packaging it as a specific version.
If you played Witcher 3 on a 1060 in your bedroom and a 2060 in your living room, and manually set different graphics profiles for both, with a different set of OS tweaks and settings, you've just done all a dev would need to do to make a Smart Delivery profile or a PS5 version of a game. No one is going to bother re-coding anything, in fact the platforms were designed so you don't have to, with the same architecture, and 100% native BC for PS4.
What you said about different coding methods would be 100% right if we were talking about porting PS3 and 360 games to each other. These days if you made a PS4 game, you could click an option to export it as an Xbox One version instead lol.
Most actual work is done by taking an older game and updating its assets to modern standards (it was too much work to be done for Sonic Colors Ultimate to be good) or taking a high fidelity game and stripping it down to somehow work on something weaker (Switch). For the same game played on good to great hardware on x86, no actual work is done. It's just a bunch of optimized settings and sliders.
ZywyPL
Banned
It does mean a lot because consoles alone don't bring much (if any) profit, it's the games where it's at. And we already see this with Returnal's 500k copies and Sony's survey asking what to change/improve, or better yet - what John Garvin himself said regarding Days Gone 2 - "don’t complain if a game doesn’t get a sequel if it wasn’t supported at launch". Because having even 100M consoles out in the wild doesn't mean much if those people don't spend their money on games but are waiting for sales or worse, are getting them from 2nd hand instead, or wait for PC release just to pirate it.
Jack Videogames
Member
This is the single most baffling pic I've seen in this site
Is that Drake
Why the long hair and the nails, what does that mean
Is that a Barcelona shirt
captainraincoat
Banned
That’s one of the main issues…covid has created a perfect storm of need for electronics and entertainment to keep people excited and if we were in normal times people would probably stand back and look and say …hey…..this is pretty shitty of a company I supported for so long
But instead the hype and need for consoles which probably should of been released 1 year later is at fever pitch
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
You're missing the point that Sony has already told us they make the games as PS4 games, then add things to the PS5 versions. But structurally and tech-wise, they are PS4 games through and through.
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
Exactly. I honestly think certain people are deliberately obtuse here to understand that both PS4 and PS5 uses the same X64 architecture, and hence there's very minimal code change (if any) to get the game running on both machine.
Not really, that will be silly and make no sense. They developed the skeleton of the game, and then adjust the fidelity in the latter stages of the development for both PS4 and PS5, with the assets developed at high fidelity then scale down instead of low fidelity assets scaling up and adding more details.
Last edited:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
The bolded is a pure lie. The numbers say that this is a lie. Unless you live in a really poor area of the world.
The new consoles came out RIGHT when they needed to. It was perfect timing to be honest. I can't speak for the Xbox Series X, because I don't have one but the PS5 had perfect timing.
ManaByte
Gold Member
It's the same libraries for PSN across PS4/PS5. That's why they were trying to shut down the PS3 store as that's separate from the PS4/PS5 setup.
Sony and Nintendo charge more simply because companies with perceived premium products (like Apple) / lack of competition (see 3rd party sports games also charging for dual entitlement) can do that. It's great that MS is being more generous with their first party, but they are not being "generous" in my opinion. Rather, they crafted their policy to offset the lack of enthusiasm for their first party games compared to their competition / make gamepass more enticing imo. No way we will ever know, but had they purchased Bethesda a year or two prior, we may never have heard of free upgrades for console games yet.
ManaByte
Gold Member
Again, the article literally never mentions GamePass once. If anything he's comparing it more to how things work with PC/Mobile which is a much bigger software market than consoles.
So what if they mention it or not? Doesn't change my view, which is that they are technically correct that Sony / Nintendo are approaching things differently, but only because they have never needed to change course.
BacklashWave534
Member
Who actually pays attention to anything the Washington Compost writes?
Similar threads
- Poll