Editorial by contributor Todd Misura
"From the eldritch horrors of Assassins Creed Unity’s faceless characters to the Master Chief Collection being bereft of quality servers, 2014 has been full of broken releases that are so subpar, they require patches just to achieve basic functionality. Some games like MCC have had day-one patches, but the sizes were massive (15gb or more in some cases) and some were available pre-release, which isn’t even new for big-budget titles. Sometimes multiple patches aren’t enough when the damage has already been done."
Far Cry debuted on March 23, 2004, meaning that next week, it will have been 20 years since Jack Carver first washed up on the shore of a tropical paradise teeming with hostile mercenaries.
Yeah, 4 was good, was hard choosing which Golden Dawn member to side with, when they were both pieces of sh!t.
I've beaten all the main entries except 2 and 6, ended up uninstalling 6 to download something else instead.
I'd love a far cry pack with the original PC game (not the half assed port on ps360) instincts, predator even a port of far cry 2 to modern consoles back when these games had their own identity and weren't far cry 3 cut and pastel
Same here, I don't know why these games get so much hate. I've thoroughly enjoyed every single one of them, with only a couple of exceptions. I wish they'd hurry up and announce Far Cry 7. The only thing I'm concerned about is the rumoured time limit.
Shaz from GL writes: "Assassin’s Creed Unity is looked at as one of the worst in Ubisoft’s iconic franchise. But playing it nearly 10 years later reveals it may just be the best"
Digital Foundry : Whether it's via FPS Boost or bespoke software upgrades, backwards compatibility on the current-gen consoles delivered an unexpected delight - the ability to liberate older console games from their 30fps limits, running them at 60 frames per second or even higher. FPS Boost did the business for Xbox Series consoles on an impressive range of titles, but there was always the sense that PS5 could do more. It's a hunch that checks out as a range of frame-rate unlocks are available for PS5, covering many must-have games - the major caveat being that only exploitable consoles running on older firmwares are invited to the party.
you love to see new life being breathed into older titles but damn the process to get there. It should be automatic that these work for everyone... not just those who exploit their systems. Really wish Sony and MS would keep this program going officially.
Damn this sucks. I want this shit so bad, but I’m not jailbreaking my console. And frankly I shouldn’t have to. I’m not a tech person, but is it really that hard for developers to unlock the framerate? Or would that have to be a large patch?
"but is it really that hard for developers to unlock the framerate?"
I guess it's not.
But it has become a profitable business if you do so.
So no one would pay for only the framerate patched to being unlocked. So studios need to offer more than that.
But this would take more time, polishing and would cost more money. So they shy away, but won't unlock the framerate, either.
That's just my personal assumption. But from what I can comprehend technically, it shouldn't be difficult to unlock framerates via a patch for older games.
... if it hadn't became a business.
frame-rate unlock should be free ...
We've seen many devs offer free patches and updates to pretty old PC titles, even bonuses ... so why can't devs offer the frame unlock patch for free (in consultation with the platform-producers) for a title from just a generation earlier?
RaidenBlack
"frame-rate unlock should be free ..."
Obviously the result of that thinking is that developers aren't even going to do it.
If they had been allowed to charge $5-10 you would see incentivized developers doing it way more often.
People just always want everything for free, but it's not free to make the patch, people have to code it then other people have to test it, and there will always be other costs involved.
If people want dollar store gaming then expect to get what you pay for.
Raiden I might be wrong but last I thought it cost money to put patches out on consoles.
As far as me paying for it, I'm not all that interested tbh. Not enough to pay for it with older games, and newer games have been pretty decent about it for the most part.
Sounds like the modder has to go in to make changes to unlock it on a game by game basis. "Simple" enough to do it unofficially, but to have it done officially, they need someone to go in a make that change, put out a patch and put it through certification, which I believe is not necessarily a cheap thing to do. It's questionable if going through this would then give them enough sales to make it worthwhile.
Many games still have physics tied to framerate, i think it's cause they wouldn't want to go in and do anything extra. Then there's the 10 dollar upgrades they rather charge. The problem is that there's no compromise, cause if I could mod my PS4 and all I'd lose is online play then id jailbreak it immediately. Mods have done so much for PC games and they could do the same for consoles, but manufacturers hafto be willing to compromise.
It's not to hard to do and there's youtube videos that break it down really well. ANyway most of us here arent able to break are console anyway due to being up to date on firmware from playing
Yep, this sucks having to require a jailbreak for something that should be standard in our industry by now. I learned my lesson when PS4 was jailbroken and I didn't keep a console on low firmware for years, but now I'm holding onto two low firmware PS5s specifically because there are features I'll be able to do that you can't do on official firmware, so this will pay off for me soon enough.
Just get it out the door and all those foolish enough to pre order or purchase day 1 will be our beta testers.
Oh just ship it with a 30gb day one patch followed by another 3gb patch that re-breaks the game then patch again.
Publishers are too busy forcing Dlc and mediocre multi-player modes down your throat that the main game gets the sham.
I think this what we have to do to fix this mess.
1 - There should be limit on how many copies of a game can be preordered ( u cannot stop ppl from preordering this is to limit the affects)
2 - No day one patches, or if they are really necessary no more than 100MB
3 - there should be a simple refund system for digital, you get play for 30 mins if you dont like send it back after that your loss
4 - Updates should also have limit of maybe 300MB to 500MB.
5 - Season Pass can never cost over $20 no matter how much content you shove in.( this might kill destiny, bcuz their season is worth like $10 but they sell it for 30 something)
Theres no one to enforece this, soo yh
this is my opinion whats yours?
I'm just waiting for the next ET of the decade here...
I've stopped buying games at launch now as I know that not only will they come half broken and need at least a min of 2 patches to be playable, but also because game review sites always mark up games higher than they should be after being promised bonuses/gifts from games publishers.
After YEARS of this nonsense, its only now that "gamers' are complaining about this? What was it that gamers used to say? Right, its part of the deal. What game isn't glitchy or broken? So on and so forth....now its a thing?
I remember when gamers like me complaint we where shunned, now cause Master Chief got some mud on his eye its sacrilege. LOL!
In any case, this HAS been going on for so long that the industry is probably saying "why are they complaining now?"
Same thing should have been done with the first piece of paid for DLC - Remember horse armor for Oblivion?
But I digress, something will happen and it will infuriate enough "gamers" that it will become a thing.
Sh!t is hilarious on the web, let me tell you.