Are Gamers Right To Expect Free 4K Updates For Already Released Games?

ScreenGurus Shaun explores the discussion around releasing 4K updates for already released games. Can gamers feel let down if it doesn't happen?

[Kingthrash360]

I expect it to be free. Since when do people pay for patches?
The only way I see it not being free is if its a remaster for next gen....even then It better be at a low price. Other than that I'd skip all day. 4k don't change or add to the gameplay. It's a resolution. ..a setting that imo isn't even as important that 60fps would be .

[LordMaim]

If you expect them to be free, don't expect them. Three years of Xbox One and Playstation 4 software will not be patched with the very odd exception and a handful of first party games. What you're talking about represents a significant number of man hours to create, and there'd be no reason for a third party developer to commit resources to an effort with no revenue attached for it in support of a game that's already on the used market.

Edit: To increase resolution, it isn't just flipping a switch. Higher resolution textures have to be implemented, sometimes higher poly models as well. For HD users, there's also additional graphic effects, lighting effects, and/or framerate possible, none of which comes for free. So to be clear, I'm not saying that developers will charge for the 4K updates, I'm saying they won't bother making them.

Patches are one thing, to fix bugs in a game that's still selling new. Developers aren't generating higher quality assets or implementing new graphic improvements, they're supporting their game so that they look good to the customer. Six months or a year down the road and most games don't get patches anymore, and when they do, it's not new content, just fixes to what's existing.

Half of your platform's library will have no improvement playing on a PS4 Pro or a Scorpio.

[OB1Biker]

'you expect them to be free, don't expect them.'
Well that's how I understand it and his comment. Not having to pay when there's a patch is the main point. Of course don't expect all of them to be patched, nobody can be forced to do so.

[JackBNimble]

Edit

[TheCommentator]

MS is offering BC for free... which costs them time and money to patch each game, already on the used market, to work on the XB1. Developers work for free after their games launch to optimize them for performance, in addition to fixing bugs. It's no different to expect 4K for free as well, as long as a developer decides to patch their game, especially since changing the resolution is not that labor intensive anyways.

We'll see which devs are dumb enough to try and sell us a 4K patch, and which devs have the pride to want owners of their games to have the best experiences they possibly can.

[Guyfamily999]

I completely understand why it works like this, considering how console development works. It just gives an edge to PC in my opinion, over these mid generations upgrades. If you buy a new graphics card, it doesn't only support the extra power for games released AFTER the graphics card.

[freshslicepizza]

On the PC you get many upgrades for free, but not on consoles

[mikeslemonade]

They should charge so some of you entitled gamers can pay for it. But a 4K update is not hard. They just unlock the resolution. It's optimization that will be more. But they can simply slap something on the box that says 4K enhanced.

[Shiken]

Don't expect any games to get patched at all then. If it gets patched, it should be free. But if NO games get patched, you have no right to bitch.

At the end of the day, you are not entitled to anything. Old games were advertised as released, not with the promise of a 4K patch.

[LordMaim]

@Shiken: Not sure who you're talking to, or who you think is bitching, I don't expect developers to work for free, but I also think the concept of the PS4 Pro and Scorpio is flawed. Early adopters are getting screwed, and the new iterations of the consoles are going to be dragging around the boat anchor of the day one consoles, so they can only push the hardware so far. Developers have to put in extra work on both consoles, go through a second certification cycle, with no additional revenue to support the extra work, and it's now mandatory for all new games being released. Should have just waited and released a new generation of consoles in 2019.

@Moldybread: PC Games are almost entirely digitally delivered in this day and age, so there is no used market. And even then, they're not supported forever.

[rainslacker]

Sony doesn't allow for patches to be paid for, so they will be free on PS4. not positive, but I believe that MS has the same policy.

There was a report last week or so that said Sony will not allow Neo patches to be sold as some sort of DLC also. Again, I'd imagine MS has the same sort of policy.

But you are right, most games probably won't get a patch.

People shouldn't expect it, but asking nicely if a dev will consider it can't hurt....so long as people can accept "no" as an answer.

@TheCommentator

A lot of that also makes the older software a viable revenue stream for older games for sale on the Xbox store(think PS1 classics on PS3), so that's probably a bigger motivation. Being able to support previously purchased titles is just a part of the deal the publishers have to accept.

BC enabling mostly doesn't take much though. Just a emulation profile which the devs have to set up. Doesn't require an extensive amount of QA, as MS uses errors or poor performance to make their emulator better, which doesn't cost the devs anything, nor do the devs have to pay compliance costs.

Releasing a patch would actually be a more expensive venture. Likely a drop in the bucket for a big publisher, but tough on the smaller devs/indies, and bigger pubs probably aren't going to care about implementing a feature on a game which no longer gets many sales, as 4K/HDR implementation isn't likely to drive a lot of sales to make it worthwhile. That's one reason why I think it might be nice if Sony supplements the costs of these patches, so the devs and pubs won't have that barrier to get the patches out, since it may not cost them much in terms of actual development for some games....but compliance testing can get costly.

[Army_of_Darkness]

Resident evil 4K re-release imminent sometime next year for the Scorpio and ps4 pro ;-)

[Shiken]

@lordmaim

Oh absoloutly the concept is flawed. I have been against it from the start.

I am just stating that people who complain about the patches have no right to as old games were not advertised to support 4K.

I am still not buying either because I already have a PS4 and X1. I refuse to support this business model.

[bouzebbal]

Question is, will games simply be patched or will they release same collections in 4K like they did with HD

[madpuppy]

@mikeslemonade,

I find it interesting that the game industry has YOU and many others in the gaming community DUPED into believing that getting the best value and support for the product you are buying from them is considered "entitled", The utter stupidity of choking down broken games, bad gameplay, Incomplete games that the publisher packaged the ending (that happens to be on the disc or DL of the core game!!) as pay for DLC the day the game is released. Or just not being happy with the way a sequel has changed for the worse. These are all things that a good consumer has a right to complain about. the only way publishers and Developers will ever be able to call me entitled is if they start giving games away for free, then I will have no right to complain. Until then, I WILL exercise my right as a consumer to get the best product for my money at the best price!
Last time I checked, the gaming industry is a business, and a business caters to it's customers with products and services that Consumers will be willing to purchase. Businesses need to do this or no one will buy from them.
those ENTITLED DEVS and PUBLISHERS need to remember who the real boss is, the customer.

[Eonjay]

Logically if you expect them to be free (and they are), and work isn't free, then not all title can be patched. Either way, they will still be upscaled to 4K so thats better than nothing. I think some publishers may want to necro bump sales so they may put in some minimal effort to improve visuals. Gamers aren't stupid, we realize that not every game studio has the time or money to pay someone to patch all 1200+ PS4 games (yes there are over 1200 games on PS4 already)

[DragonPaw]

Support for a game is important as long as consumers and developers find the game relevant. If the developers give up on a game before consumers do then that is a disservice and a disrespect to their patrons. I agree that not all games should get patches especially obvious flops, but any that sold well should be patched.

Who wants to have a bunch of games for their current console that are obsolete technically. Sony has made it as easy as possible to patch games by keeping the same architecture but suping it up.

[Death]

I question the design of these mid-gen consoles if they need patches to take advantage of the hardware. When I slap a new GPU in my PC, why does the hardware increase the graphic fidelity/fps without a patch? It's shocking that the Pro doesn't do this and it will be even more disappointing if Scorpio follows the same flawed model.

[Deadpooled]

I feel it's better to leave it for the developer to decide.

[ONESHOTV2]

Kingthrash360-----you dont pay for patches but the devs do so no i dont think we should expect any type of free update becuase it's not free for the creators. and this is why i own a rig i dont need to depend on the devs to patch anything in my game i play at the res+ settings my GPU + CPU can push.

[porkChop]

I don't think the question was about them being free. It seems the author meant are we right to expect those updates for *every* game. In which case, no, we are not right. These updates take time and resources that are better put to use with new titles. Some games will get updates, but most probably won't.

[MoonConquistador]

Well spotted porkChop, all the messages before yours highlight just how little attention people pay to the articles and use this site as a sounding board for their own views, whether they are on topic or not.

Even stranger in this entitled generation are the people expecting to get Driveclub VR for free just because they purchased the original game.

So the answer to the question is no, I'm not expecting updates for any of my previously bought games. I'd like to think Sony were smart enough to plan ahead for the pro's launch by requesting that devs develop their games within the last 6 months to at least take advantage of the extra power though.

And from the looks of it I'll also gladly pay for driveclub VR when I eventually get my PS VR

[Red_Renegade]

i want it to be free. but i don't expect it to be free. i don't expect anybody to do work for free, and i expect people to want to get paid for that work. anything else is weird.

[IGiveHugs2NakedWomen]

Does anyone actually believe that developers are actually going to give away these types of patches on games that are now less than $30? If you do, prepare to be disappointed.

[donthate]

If I'm paying upgrading to Sony's selling point of upscaled 4K and higher resolution, then Sony can pay for the patches to make it available to me for free. Otherwise, sock it!

If any devs try, they can keep their game and I will boycott their product too.

I'm just hoping that with MS announcing Scorpio so early, that they are actively getting developers to do free patches for a lot of games. I hope Sony is doing the same, because both of them working on this is better for all gamers.

[daynnight365]

Perfectly worded post keep it up

[jmc8888]

ROFL, it doesn't take a lot of time to change resolutions.

No one is saying, adding different textures or anything else, it's like a command in the console, that we don't have access to because it's a console game. Thus, the need for a patch.

Remove the 30FPS cap on games and allow for 60 also isn't hard. The only time this would be an issue is if the game's animation is tied to framerate.

It's so weird people that play console only really think this stuff is time intensive and hard.

Do people really think they can't have a couple employees for a couple of days tasked to going through their catalog of PS4 games doing this? That this is somehow a major cost? That we shouldn't expect it because it's old?

As to people saying higher resolution textures have to be implemented? Nope. You can stretch out a texture all you want. You just won't gain fidelity in that area if you keep the same textures.

No one was saying remastering the game, they wanted 4k. You see sometimes it'll look better because it makes everything clearer and sharper. Other times they might be using textures above the native resolution (still far below 4k) but it would add *some* fidelity.

LordMaim is completely wrong.

On PC you can use low textures at any resolution. They don't require you to bump up the texture level at a certain resolution... hell you can do the opposite too with ultra textures at 720p (or lower).

All people are asking for is that since it's a closed system where people don't have access to the settings, that the dev do it because they do. That's it. Switch the settings, which is indeed the case.

[BEASELY]

For games like Overwatch, Rainbow Six, MGSV etc., it should be expected due to their long shelf life and continued play. If anything, it re-freshes these releases and keeps them selling.

[2pacalypsenow]

I expect them to be free, I don't expect them on every game since they take time and money to make, if the dev doesn't want to spend time and resources that's his right.

[Eonjay]

This. Totally agree. Especially if they don't get paid... it is essentially volunteer work lol.

[Death]

I disagree. You are speaking like the games are out of print and the developer won't recoup the minimal investment. If they patch the games for "free", why won't this be incentive for PS4Pro owner to buy the games if they already haven't? Isn't that the same idea behind GOTY editions? The patch works for both previous and future software sales.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

If a company makes a 4k update for a game I would expect it to a free update. If that update not only gives a 4k boost but also drops in a bunch of new content then no, I would expect that update to cost to be directly/proportionate to the new content being delivered and not based on the 4k bump.

[Eonjay]

Totally agree but I want to point out that I see you making a similar statement as everyone else. There is no such thing as a 4K update. The machine (and concordantly your TV) will make the content upscale to 4K regardless of whether or not the dev does anything. A Pro update is what folks are talking about right? This is where other effects are included or better lighting, or higher res textures and what not

[OC_MurphysLaw]

Hey Eonjay, Yes when I say 4k Update I do mean a Pro or Scorpio (future talking) update... where a game was released and XYZ company says hey... remember that game we released last year well now if you buy it or have it you can run it on a PS4 Pro and you will see better textures through a texture pack update, etc... Not just an upscale from 1080P to 4K output but an actual updated texture pack to replace existing, etc....

I think that kind of update should be given free to existing owners that can take advantage of it.

[jmc8888]

Upscale is not the same thing whatsoever.

Why does everyone think that changing the resolution and allowing higher framerate somehow takes a ton of time (it's a few settings changes), and that this is somehow calling for different assets (textures, lighting, etc)

It's not. Change 30FPS cap to 60 FPS. Change the 1600x900 or 1920x1080 to 4k. No one is asking for them to create different assets.

But in many cases, guess what, those better assets do exist, in which case they might want to add them. You see most games came out on PC, so they do have better assets for most of these games. They will have higher level textures, because that game that has a PC version, will generally have the assets to support them because the PC version was 4k capable 2-3-5+ years ago.

I think it's perfectly fine for 1st party studios who only made one level of assets to simply just raise the resolution and framerate if it's possible. Again the only time it's not feasible is if the animation is tied to 30 or 60 FPS, changing that would be time consuming. But that's rare as most don't tie framerate to animation.

Even then there are some other settings that increase the quality of the game given the assets already there... i.e. if they didn't create a higher level of assets, they can tweak other things like draw distance.

But either way is possible and doesn't really add to the cost because settings and assets are there.

As for Sony's fee, well, that's something Sony controls doesn't it? It would be a smart business decision to waive the patch fee. Why? Because it would add to the value of the PS4 Pro. Sony wants us to buy it right? Well, then waive the patch fee for PS4 Pro updates.

It's really not hard or time consuming, and adds value.

[Death]

Well said JMC. I'm not sure why so many people are convinced these things are hard or impossible and shouldn't be done. Patching should by no means be mandated, but the opposite would be expecting it to not happen either. Too many people are already excusing updates to take advantage of the Pro's hardware instead of simply requesting it be done.

[firelogic]

4K updates for free would be great but I don't expect it. Not because I'm jaded but because there's a lot of work that goes into making a game 4K/HDR. Simply equating it to a patch is illogical. A patch for the most part fixes bugs so that the game operates the way it should or maybe some QoL changes. Yes there are free content updates but those are mostly superficial like adding a new costume or new new multiplayer mode/map (usually not free). Even the lauded Witcher 3 with the "TONS" of free DLC is largely superficial. Alternate costumes. New weapon skins. Beard trimming mode.

Not to mention, the game you bought was never promised to give you a 4k/hdr experience. Why are you expecting something that wasn't supposed to be there for free? You're basically saying that if you bought The Last of Us, you're entitled to The Last of Us remastered for free. Or if you bought Wind Waker, you're entitled to Wind Waker HD for free. But no, you say, that's a bad example because those games were on different consoles. The end result is the same though. They're taking an existing game and sprucing it up for a new visual experience.

What about VR patches? Should those be free too?

[Gamist2dot0]

Az much az I dislike it, I agree. Companies have to pay people just for a patch which they might get nothing in return.

Come to think of it, I think they should because it encourages people who haven't own the game to reconsider.

[kevnb]

the pc version already plays in 4k, all the they have to do is implement the configuration. And those games are actually ports, of course they are not free.

[XXanderXX]

No , most developers have moved on to their next project and to go back would delay the new projects and take away from new games budget for a game already released .

[Maxor]

I read somewhere that Sony charge developers to release patches. Some can run up to 40K per patch so while the developers want to release them for free, they still have to pay Sony to give you something for free. So it's not entirely the developers fault.

[XXanderXX]

Not blaming developers , just feel that going back to an already released game for something so non essential is a waste of time & resources .

[rainslacker]

Patches themselves, with a modest amount of additional content to support that patch(Less than 250MB last time I looked) cost around $8-10K depending on the deals Sony may have with the publisher. Depending on when the game was released, and if it's had any patches yet, pubs may not have to pay anything, as they get two "free" with the initial compliance testing. Initial compliance testing can range between $10-50K depending on the size of the game, and the deals Sony has with the particular publisher.

Indie publication directly on the store has a set fee for everything, but typically they are smaller games, however, tend to be fairly reasonable. Even their patches are pretty inexpensive. However, since they don't sell for as much, and often nowhere near as many copies as bigger games, it still may not be worth it to those devs in some cases.

Not really the devs fault, and even on the dev side they still have production costs to make the patch itself. It's still an expense that has to be incurred, and there is really no way to avoid it.

Wouldn't mind if Sony would allow for free patch compliance testing, or greatly reduced costs for that specific feature to be patched in with no additional content to run through compliance, just so more developers would feel more comfortable supporting it, and even the bigger devs could pass the actual development costs on to the back of a few interns with very little effort on their part. Would help promote more updates, and bring more good will to the gamers in general.

This might be something Sony works on to help build more "neo mode" games for the system. As of right now, it seems to fall into their general patch/DLC policies, with the only specifics to them being that the 4K patches can't be sold through DLC packs....which themselves aren't considered patches, as patches are for all users of the game.

[sk8ofmnd]

Only for gamers who actually own a 4k set. Seems the same ppl crying for 4k content are the same ones without the resolution in the first place. Hint hint people claiming the scorpio will be this or that much better. News flash, your 1080p set from 2009 wont come close.

[shammgod]

it would be a bad move if they charged. People are already jumping ship to PC, if console games have to be rebought, you can forget about even releasing the 4k consoles.

[gamingisnotacrime]

my next buy will be a gaming PC. this gen has been very dissapointing

[shammgod]

It has! And the fact they are putting out new consoles to upgrade the experience mid-console life is not a good sign. Nobody should be happy with it

[ryuuzakibjorn]

"Are Gamers Right To Expect Free 4K Updates For Already Released Games?" - Yes.

[gamingisnotacrime]

i am not paying for a 4K patch. If they want to charge then i miss out it seems. If gamers pay for it then that will set the standard for milking the sht out of gaming

[MasterCornholio]

I expect them to be free however I don't expect every game to be patched for 4K. After the Pro is out I can definitely see developers making games specific to its hardware. But I'm expecting most to render at a higher resolution than 1080P and to use checkerboarding to reach 4K.

[sk8ofmnd]

I remember when ms was saying make games on par with our product as another or not at all. Im so glad that when the underdog, claims like that are not only irrelevant, but in all reality arent good for gaming as a whole. If a games maker made a stronger hardware spec, game companies should be able to take advantage of said hardware. I dont see them making waves when the supposed scorpio spec will support native resolutions the pro cant.

[stalepie]

Didn't Sony say they would be, or do I misremember? Just another clickbait headline probably. No integrity in journalism.

[rainslacker]

Yes, Sony said Devs/pubs can not charge for neo modes, nor make them part of DLC packs. Former part just fell into their general policies on patches, and the actual compliance standards don't actually single out Neo modes. The DLC policy, which is different than patches, does specifically say that Neo modes can't be bundled exclusively with said DLC packs.

So the expectation isn't if it's right for us to expect it(in relation to PS4), it's that what we get will have to be free on Sony consoles(and I assume MS consoles since the policies are probably similar).

There is no mandate that older games have to be patched though, and to that part of the article, I say that gamers are not right to expect it for every game....and if they do, they will be disappointed and be pissed off about it.

Going forward, compliance requires Neo modes in any game releasing after a certain date. It's actually later than the originally reported Oct/NOV from the rumors though, as some games late in production won't have time to actually implement them....particularly some localized games from japan which released 1-2 years ago over there.

[ziggurcat]

uh... there's no fee for games that get the Pro treatment...

[Destiny1080]

its got to be free

you cant buy a ps4-pro and then find out you need 3k worth of patches

[B1uBurneR]

If we consider BC on XBOX one as games patches and MS doesn't charge for the improvements or lack off. Should we hold Sony to the same standard or would holding Sony to MS standard would be beneath Sony?

As a member of the Sony Fanbase We demand it or bust! Or we will boycott until we see fit! Look into our eyes you are getting sleepy, sleeeppy, very sleepy. Listen to our commands Patch older games to give us more visual candy over the competition make our older games 4K native like The Last of us. This system is not a true future proof native 4K device so lets make the best of it. You better not charge either. Same thing goes for MS and Scorpio matter fact copy and paste your patches on the Scorpio games but use the extra Teraflops I want to see tears in AI tear drops. NOW!! or in 2017 I'll wait.

[Red_Renegade]

bc isn't a patch, for one thing. 4k updates can't be charged for as commanded by sony, for another. you're not a sony fan, either.

[rainslacker]

Sony mandates that devs can't charge for Neo mode patches/updates, so no reason to demand, Sony's already got you covered. There was an article about it a couple weeks ago.

Sony does not require that all already released titles get a Neo mode....same way MS doesn't require that all 360 games be made available through their emulation solution.

[Aenea]

Free? Yes, of course, would be crazy to have to pay for them.

Expect? No

Want? Hell yes!

But we can't always get what we want, sadly.

[yomfweeee]

Sony already said devs can't charge for 4k patches.

Should devs be expected to update their old games? No.

[Ozmoses]

every update I've ever installed for any game has been free... whether it fixed bugs, improved stability, changed the UI, whatever.... updates are always free because that's the only way to play the current form of the game...

like online games... if you don't download the update then you can't play online until you do...

it will more than likely boil down to the same concept/principle when updating games with 4K/HDR support....

new releases probably as early as Feb 2017 (like Horizon: Zero Dawn) will start having the features installed since day 1...

older games will follow suit... obviously depending on the support of the "game in question", the developers, etc. etc....

some developers that I believe will support games their games with updates are Rockstar, Naughty Dog, Sony Santa Monica, CD Projeckt Red (I know they said they are done supporting witcher, but you know they will...), Techland (Dying Light post-launch support has been phenomenal)....

if they're completely 100% optional updates that you have to download directly from the PS Store... well then that's a different story and then yes I suppose they would charge for them...

but I expect it to be like any normal update... it's just whether or not the developer cares enough about that particular game/the fans to do it.

[WilliamSheridan]

If they do update it, it should be free. But I don't expect all games to update

[MoveTheGlow]

Sigh. The lack of framerate prioritization is sad. I'd go back and actually play through Fallout 4 if they could make the thing run a little more smoothly. 4K's for the birds. Birds with thousands of disposable dollars.

[iceman06]

While I don't expect EVERY title, it would be a great incentive to revisit the more popular titles. That being said, if it takes away too much from current dev cycles, I'd be just as happy if they focus on the future titles.

[1nsomniac]

Yes. No way in hell am I paying for a patch to increase resolution. Even the thought of that is insanely stupid. Assets are scaled down to lower resolutions in the first place when baked in-game. For the majority of cases it would just take a minor adjustment taking a fraction of a second to apply.

You want us to now pay for this as well???

[Duke19]

Not saying its right, but there is money to be made there, and I fully expect companies to charge for it.

[NovusTerminus]

I'm expecting recently launched big name games to get them, but I am (as much as I would like it to) not expecting anything as far back as Dark Souls 3 or Bloodborne to get one.

[NotEvenMyFinalForm]

Meanwhile on PC when you upgrade your hardware you can instantly enjoy the benefits across all games old or new for free.

[ILostMyMind]

Nobody cares!

[Red_Renegade]

meanwhile on pc upgrading hardware isn't the same thing at all, and it's not free since you have to buy the new hardware.

[annoyedgamer]

Yes. I want it and I will not pay for it.

[Espangerish]

Ideally they would be free, but I would be willing to pay a small fee if it allows developers to divert resources away from their new projects to go back and optimise older games really well.

The key here is, I would pay if it meant top quality optimised patches for 4K and 1080p modes.

[Phill-Spencer]

Short answer: we can't expect these free updates for already released ones(it's fine if we get them though because i wouldn't pay for them), but every New game should have it included for free.

[GrimmyReaper]

They are right to expect any and all of them to be free.
They are not right to expect them for all games though.

[kevnb]

if all we are talking about is configuration changes in the already existing game code then yes.

[WickedLester]

Depends on the cost of patching them I guess. There are three games I'm telling you right now I'd pay a fee for PS Pro improvement, Driveclub, Ratchet and Clank, and The Witcher 3. I'd pay for all of those updates just to get them at 60fps.

[KickSpinFilter]

I think free or not at all, but to pay for it nope.

[uth11]

Well gamers expect everything for free and they always feel they're right, so sounds like a rhetorical question

[ILostMyMind]

And if the improved resolution is in a new DLC ... would you pay for it?

[andresegr]

Seeing how damn entitled gamers have been lately, obviously most of them will be expecting FREE 4K updates.

God forbid developers charge something Extra for their Extra work!

[Kenshin_BATT0USAI]

I only expect it for 1st party games. Give me bloodborne 60fps. Gdi

[Crakface]

No one wants to pay so just move on. We don't deserve Shit

[TheColbertinator]

Nope. EA,Ubisoft,Microsoft and Sony all have their teams on tight schedules to release content. The fact that Sony gave 4K updates to any games from before the launch of Pro is surprising.

Microsoft wont run all their games on 4K and its understandable. Doubt Insomniac will halt their current projects for the sake of Sunset Overdrive.

[LexHazard79]

Im not paying for a resolution update. Sorry...you want us to play 4K games, patch it.

[Majin-vegeta]

Free:Yes
Every game:Nope

[mastershredder]

Oh, you'll pay for it alright....in the footprint.

[Takwin]

PC gamers absolutely will revolt if they try to charge for it. They have console gamers by the balls.

[Maxor]

They had console gamers by the balls since day 1 with the pay to play online robbery. They have developers by the balls too since both Sony and MS charge the developers money to release patches on their network. This is the problem with gaming and walled gardens. They're basically set up to trap you inside and rape your wallet.

[PaleMoonDeath]

From any modern console absolutley not.

From a £1000+ PC? yeah sure.

[Movefasta1993]

What about a 700 pound PC ?

[Maxor]

When I upgrade my PC with a new GPU, the improvement is immediate. Everything runs better, looks better. I get my 60 FPS and whatever resolution I'm targeting without any fuss or waiting for the "4K patch". So why I shouldn't I expect the same for the Pro and the Scorpio? This is what Sony and MS need to get right, if you're going to provide upgrades, then do it right. It's not an upgrade if it only works for 10% of the library and all the old games get left behind.

[REDGUM]

I don't think so, in relation to the title.
There's obviously more work involved in developing or even refreshing the game to the higher specs. That costs money.
I understand that gamers don't want to have to fork out twice for the same game and would prefer a free upgrade but if the company is making less or no money for the upgrade then how are they to create more (new games). They'd need revenue to do this.

Just like a remaster, (Bioshock), fantastically mind blowing with huge improvements or just a port & basically the same graphics, they didn't come out in the shops for free did they?

"Oh, I owned Bioshock on ps3 so i should have a free copy, why should I have to buy the game twice" ?? Really!!

Im a Furniture maker, i don't give out free upgrades to those who brought a 6ft bookcase and now want a new flashy 7ft bookcase??

Besides, wouldn't alot of gamers go to the bargain bins at your local and fish out the ps4 games just to get free 4K upgrades??

Developers need to make money or we loose a future of gaming.

Just an opinion though!

[Hedstrom]

I would wish them to be free for consumers. I think Sony should have paid a couple of thousand of dollars for some of the most popular released games to get Pro patched. Not all of course, but maybe set a pot of a million dollar to getting old games patched, the developer who patch their game gets maybe from 5000$ to 50.000$ depending on the work behind the patch. Then they could get their own section on psn with some extra promotion.

[Petebloodyonion]

Let me repeat myself for last 100 times on this subject.

Playstation fans wants to pay for remasters, seconds servings and Patches at high price and they are eager to defend this model. Thus Sony is more then happy to oblige by charging you money.

On the other hand, PC players don't pay for the extra settings on a game cause they know that unlocking frame rate, increasing resolution as been around since early pc games ( Heck I can run original 1997 Quake 2 at 1600X1200 and 120 frames sec with no patches) nor do they pay again for their games when they change Os, computer or swap to Mac and Linux, thus is why game like Skyrim remaster, Bioshock collection are FREE on pc for current owner of the game.

So yes, unfortunately, Expect to pay for some 4k Patches for PS pro (hey you already paid for the 1080P one).

[opinionated]

If it's already a remaster then I think it's fair to have a free update on that remaster. If it's a new remaster, like if EA did a skate remaster and added 4K goodies then I think it's fair game to charge. So it depends on the circumstance in my view.

[Dioxinis]

Why shouldnt they? PC has had higher resolutions for years and can change them on the fly no extra downloads or money required. Even sleeping dogs GRID, and GTA4 released hi resolution packs for free just required a download. Consoles are closer now to PCs then they've ever been. Any multiplats should absolutely not require extra money.... though i guess i may understand console exclusives require it because the games werent made with high textures in mind... having said that i can see a big company setting a precident for it.... i mean they've already done it with HD remakes... but many of those were on different hardware architecture...If a big enough company does it it can spoil the rest.... similar to how Activision made it ok to charge 60 dollars for PC games with MW2

[PistolsAtDawn]

No, in general gamers are too spoiled and have no business sense...would be nice though.

[BigLurch]

Or in Ps4 Pros case,a free upscale update!

[Derpy]

I don't see why they should expect that. They got fully what they paid for, namely the resolution mentioned on the box. No company should be expected to support hardware that comes out after their product went to market. If they choose to do so, then they do it of their own free will and that's nice, but anyone thinking they are obligated to do so is naive.

[HaHa_Ostrich]

Will vanilla games simply run better by themselves on the pro? I mean with power to spare games might run smoother. Or does it have to be patched as well?

[vergilxx3]

Doubt there will be many updates unless Sony pays them ,no one will do this out of there good will

[hafitz]

No probs on PC for old games to run on 4k..buy a monitor and voila, 99% of the old games run tremendously on 4K Native for Free!

[2cents]

I'd say it would be a very welcome gesture form the publishes. If the same game is now being made to run on two different consoles PS4 / PS4P then it does really fall to the publisher to make these changes if they want to stay relevant. Especially if they want some reinvigorated sales off the back of the PS4P release.

I don't think I would pay to patch an old game to run better on the PS4P, especially if they re-release their old software with the update, then we should really not have to pay.

[mochachino]

If it cost devs money to upgrade then gamers should expect to pay for it.

It's not like PC wher every resolution is built in andnonly limited by your GPU.

[DivineAssault]

They should be free.. However i dont think devs should be forced to update games they already made unless they want to.. Most people who want to play those games, have already.. The games moving forward should all offer it free

[Pro_TactX]

No. If 4K was not a factor when you entered into the purchasing contract, then it is unreasonable to expect it later. It might be nice to have, but shouldn't be expected.

[ocelot07]

I don't expect it. But I would really appreciate it. I would love to play Killzone Shadowfall in 4K. As well as Driveclub and Warframe ect.

[Spenok]

Absolutely not. If anyone ever expects anything to be free they need to get off their entitled asses and realize NOTHING is ever free. Someone, somewhere needs to work or pay for that "free" item. While I'm all for them providing free updates, I certainly never "expect" anything to be that way.

Does that mean I'll just lay down and accept them every time if they were charging for them? Absolutely not. That's just when I exercise my right to not buy that product. Will I be upset it's not free, perhaps, though not because it's not free, but rather because I may not be able to or want to.

Let's just get this straight. You are entitled to NOTHING! So expecting anything is just foolish.

[SuperbVillain]

yes,i think we're all right for expecting free updates to 4k Televisions. Make mine a Samsung. Thanks, Sony