"Sony seems to be taking the initial lead over Microsoft’s next generation console by doing the right things. They have shown us the games they have been working on and the technology they will be using to power them up on the PlayStation 4."
This is one of my biggest problems with my PS3. I don't often play games on it, but when I do, I'm forced to sit through gigabytes of patches that usually take longer to download and install than I planned on playing the game for in the first place... Sony really needs to get their shit together with their servers for the PS4. A 2 GB update should not take 35 minutes when I can get an update of the same size off of Steam or Origin in 10.
Agreed. It gets pretty annoying when I open my orange envelope to play through a new game, and the first thing I must do is DL and install the latest update. Initially, the patches were there, but nowhere near the extent which they now are available. While game patches are obviously a good thing, it makes one wonder.....why is such a newly realeased game forced to have so many patches? Do not games release they way they're supposed to anymore? In a rush to get games to the consumer, they release games with problems. I love gaming and I will continue doing so, but the system in place should definitely be made better. I do love the setting of the auto updates when I'm not on the system, but this doesn't apply to new games that my system doesn't recognize. Perhaps if we could check for updates on games which we know we're going to put into the dics tray for future, we could save some time? That would be cool. What also gets me is the digital DL of games. Why is it that I DL a digital game, and yet I still have to DL the update separately? Should not the update or patch already be placed to the game itself? Why is the additional DL passed onto the player? Seems counterintuitive to me. Just do it once on your end so that every player need not do that. Yes I understand the cost efficiency and the finances involved, but the thing is, in a comepetative market, you need to throw the gamer a bone now and again to make your console more appealing due to convenience. How much money or much a problem could it really be to reinstall the digital game on the server with all of its current updates? It only makes practical sense to save every gamer 5 minutes in the long run.
Yep, devs and publishers need to sort this out, selling us unfinished games has really become far to common place this gen. Someone disagrees, interesting, you like buying unfinished games?.......
What I think TKCMuzzer is trying to say is that unlike the PS2 era this time around developers are not required to polish up the game 100% before releasing because they can always patch it last minute. It is true that pretty often we have to download updates on day one or in the first few weeks to fix problems that would have normally been ironed out prior to the release of the game through extensive beta testing. Its a double ended sword but at least with this chip we will be able to update while we game so it won't be much of an inconvenience unless its a mandatory update in which case you could always play another game while you wait.
Thats BS. Most ps2 ps1 era games were riddled with glitches, not to mention the advancements in graphics and physics in current gen games are accompanied with tech harder to work with, so its completely unfair to compare last gen games to current gen games regarding being finished or unfinished.
The problem is that neither interal Alpha or Beta testing got any shorter, they seen to be the same they were one generation before, but as those games grew in complexity, they become more prone to have problems. So there's two solutions, patches early on or add testing time, both costs money to add on top of the increasing costs of development, but only extra time delay the game going gold, which means it takes more time to start making some back. I don't think it makes much difference for developers, but for publsihers (always wanting more money in less time) it's the best strategy... As long as gamers keep buying "broken" games, that is. If we're voting with our wallets they would think again if it's not better to spend a little more time. In my opinion publishers had gone really out of touch with us costumers trhoughout this gen. The price of development growing is real, but they keep making the wrong decisions about how they'll deal with that... They need (and want) more money, but instead of trying to attract more people where it matter (price), they either go for non-gamers (risky move as you are aiming at a demograph that's not necessarily interested and may as well piss of gamers already interested in the process) or try to suck more money from the few already interested (not only they raised the price of games from past gen to current, they added DLC, Online Passes, Season/Premium/Elite services, microtransactions, etc). Had they gone the other way and made games cheaper maybe we wouldn't be having this conversation, as attach rate would probabbly much higher. Sure current gen consoles also didn't help by starting at a higher price, but this next gen looks like it's not going to be the problem to attract more early adopters (or more gamers down the road), so I think the heat is on publishers now. Imagine if they call prices back down to 50 bucks, maybe they could afford to take their time and deliver complete games knowing more people will buy.
All this complaining about patching a game on PS3 by ways of being online but the same idiots are complaining about XBOne being always online. So isn't your PS3 always online?
That's why Bioshock Infinite did such a good job, they delayed the game several times to try & completely finish the game.
TKCMuzzer + 19h ago | Well said Yep, devs and publishers need to sort this out, selling us unfinished games has really become far to common place this gen. Someone disagrees, interesting, you like buying unfinished games?.. Those guys who disagreed there are developers who have to work for publishers like EA, Ubisoft etc ;-)
I used to have a 1 MB connection,I never had issues with patches or system updates, just turn it on and do something instead of stare at the TV the whole time. Now the PS3 even updates everything automatically for you (if you have PS+ I believe) so I don't see how the patch stuff is still an issue.
I have a top notch data connection and I am not so impatient that it turns me off, but it is uneccessary. That's what I'm saying. Auto updates do not address the patches for a game which you haven't put in yet. If your console does not have game install data on it, you have no patch to automatically DL. New games which you have just opened up to play and introduce to your console, has an update 90% of the time. How exactly does auto updates affect that? They don't. They only apply to system firmware or existing games which you've already played or introduced to your HDD. What I'm suggesting is this....... - Say you're going to buy Black Ops on payday. It's currently Wed. and you get paid on Friday. You know the game will be in your console on that Friday. Why can't we search for newest Black Ops updates on the Wed. so that it's already installed for Friday, because we all know that when we put the game in, it's going to be there waiting for us to install it. This way we can DL without waiting a few minutes before we first play it.
It will still offload some of the workload from the main CPU which can be used fully for gaming. Having an extra chip in there for background processes is a plus in my book.
Just need to nip in somewhere and point out that SecondSon's comment "It's a double ended sword" is flawed as he/she has confused a double 'edged' sword with a double 'ended' dildo. I'm a pedant.
@nugnugs best single comment on this page
Agreed. Every time I turn on my ps3 to play a game I'm greeted with "A new system update is available to download" and it sometimes puts me off wanting to play the game anymore.
You get a system update every-time you play a game on your PS3, what firmware are you up to?
@TKCMuzzer Believe it or not, but some of us have jobs, family, friends, hobbies, other interests, and so on....
So a 15 minute update because you play one game every 3months is off putting? Wow. i have a job a family friends and a new baby. I still have enough time to do this. Come on now not wanting to play a game because of patches is the most overreaching exaggeration ever.
@Pandamobile I have no problem with the speed of downloads whether it be patches, demo's or full games on my PS3. I've heard people complain before but to me its never been an issue, mine does 1.5 gig in 7 mins (I timed it), now to me that seems pretty good. I did compare this to my 360 and surprise surprise.......there was no difference. Maybe it's to do with your IP, or where your based, who knows. One note, I have PS+ so pretty much everything is already done when my PS3 is turned on.
Haha, I guess someone else was timing your download speed going by the disagrees.
Same here. I've never had problems with downloads. Only when I had a shitty ISP and was getting lower than 1MBPS. We get 11 or 12 now and I can download a 1.5 gb DL in about 15-30 minutes. I'm pretty patient with downloads so that could be a reason too.
You're no forced to do anything. You can just skip them.
If I skip the update it persistently bugs me when I'm playing the game. I'd be playing All Stars with my friends and then the update prompt would appear, and someone would hit X by accident (because we're trying play a damn game) and then it would close the game and start the stupid update. I don't consider that "Being able to skip" if it feels it needs to bug me about it every 5 minutes.
"I don't often play games on it" Then why on earth do you have a PS3.
Netflix and Blu rays, obviously.
I always see people saying stuff like "constant patches" and "takes so long to download" but that literally has not happened to me. Well, the slow downloads did when the patches first came out because of traffic, but I've never had "constant patches" or consistently slow downloads. Are you sure it's not your ISP?
Yeah, I used to think the downloads were slow until (ding dong) I realized I was using the wireless feature. When I hooked it up straight from my router, it was like night and day difference. Don't use wireless for downloads. Plus, most patches are less than 50mb anyways and download pretty quick. I just hate that it doesn't download and install at the same time. With the PS4, this issue seems have to been solved and people can stop bitching. Literally all the things that were negative about the PS3 has seemed to be fixed with the PS4. That's a good thing right?
I have to use wireless myself because my PS3 is in my room and my modem is in the living room so it's either wireless or a really long ethernet cable. Wireless definitely does slow things down though. "Literally all the things that were negative about the PS3 has seemed to be fixed with the PS4. That's a good thing right?" Definitely.
dragonknight - just go with the really long ethernet cable... you will thank me later lol... always go wired in.
use the ps plus automatic update feature,it helps.
I don't want to pay for an auto-update feature...
@Pandamobile it's funny because I thought the same thing, and I guess I'm used to Xbox because the system auto updates whether or not you have Xbox Live Gold. If MS can do it for free, surely Sony also can.
If PSN is slow blame your ISP, I have 100Mb/s internet and PSN is as fast or faster than any other download service.
PSN is slow because PSN is slow. My ISP is fine. I have 30 Mbps internet, so my download speeds are usually 3-4 MB/s on Steam, uTorrent and pretty much everything else I use. PSN doesn't even let me know the speeds at which it's downloading. Just a vague progress bar that takes way longer than it should.
I typically get 5-8MB/s for PSN downloads. I just downloaded 956MB in 2:32, which is typical for me. So it's not PSN that's slow, if it were it would be slow for everyone.
I downloaded Crysis 3 in less then 20 mins. I haven't had any problems downloading movies or anything.
PSN is not the fastest, but upgrading your internetsub does help a lot. I went from 30 to 80 Mb/s and downloading is now faster than installing. The XMB speedtest (wired) says 29 or 30 Mb/s, but when downloading an update it's more like 10 Mb/s, where it used to be 2 or 3.
That's a lie, any laptop out of Best Buy could download faster from better hardware alone. "PSN is as fast or faster than any other download service." Why can't bubble down for blatantly lying be an option? The crap that people will say on the internet is insane.
@UNGR It might be a lie if you said it but it works fast for me.
Just to see how Steam is running at the moment I did a 1.7gb download and was averaging about 5.5MB/s with a peak of 8MB/s. According to Speedtest my connection speed was over 92MB/s and I'm using an i7 950 connected via gigabit Ethernet directly to my cable modem, so the source of any slowness is not at my end. So today, right now for me PSN is as fast or faster than the much vaunted Steam.
5-8 MB/s is a pretty quick download. You have to remember that MB/s is not the same as Mb/s. Speedtest will display your results in megabits per second, but most real-world downloads will display speeds in megabytes per second. 8 MB/s is roughly 64 Mb/s. So in that case, it's probably Steam that's slower than your internet (because 100 Mbps internet is insanely fast for what 99% of people in North America are used to). For me, I tend to max out my allotted bandwidth when I download stuff off Steam because I'm only at 30 Mb/s, which Steam can easily keep up with. Yet on PSN, I'm lucky to get half the speed I do on Steam. Either the servers they have me connected to are thousands of miles away, or they just can't handle the amount of users they have.
Wow... Amazing... You said something a tiny bit negative about the PS3 and got 60+ disagrees for it. Go figure... ~eyeroll~ Anyway, you are 100% correct. I'm glad to see somebody else has noticed how terrible the PS3 is with patches, and just with download speed in general. I played LBP2 for the first time over the weekend, and it took about 40 minutes until the patches were all completed. The longest update I think I've ever had for a 360 game took me about 20 seconds. For those of you who wonder why people are willing to pay for Xbox LIVE, this is an example of a very good reason.
Look at my below comment. PS plus is where it is at.
I do agree with your sentiment here. I tried to bring GT5 to a friends house with my wheel and we had so many updates to download on his console that we were unwilling to sit through them to play. I couldve brought my ps3 over, sure, but it kinda hurts the experience.
@Pandamobile Other then BF3, which games have gigabyte patches? I am a PS plus subscriber and ever since then i have not had to sit and wait for a single patch. Love the auto download for plus subscribers.
You're not wrong, ps+ can eliminate a lot of these wait times, no doubt. The problem comes when you've never played a game before, so ps+ doesn't download patches for it in advance. Like my previous example. I played LBP2 for the first time ever the past weekend. I'm a new plus subscriber (based on all the rave reviews I've read about it on this site, mostly), and I'd played the original LBP, but never bothered with the sequel. Well, I fired it up this weekend, and had to sit through 40 minutes of unskippable updates before I could play. That kind of shit is inexcusable in this day and age, and is one of the main reasons the 360 was my dominant console this gen. So say all you want about ps+, I think it is a fantastic service for the right kind of person, but for somebody like me that normally buys games new at launch anyway, it doesn't hold much value. Then something like this comes along where I try to play a "free" game from ps+ that I had skipped at launch. And I have to sit through 40 minutes of updates first, and I'm reminded why Xbox Live rules the roost when it comes to console games online. Now, I realize that this is N4G and since I'm not kissing Sony ass in this post, I'll probably get 50 or 100 disagrees, but that's just the way it is. But also, I'm not an Xbox fanboy, and I don't love what MS has shown me about the One, and I have to be fair here, Sony hasn't shown me anything that has made me jump out of my seat either. Without a doubt, and contrary to most people on this site, I'll end up buying both consoles. And I'll decide which is my primary based on a number of things, not the least of which will be the controller, which MS already leads by a TON over the shitty (my left stick is in the wrong place) Dualshock. I know I'm going to get attacked for this post, and to be perfectly honest, I don't care. People on this site need to lighten up and get with the 21st century. It's ridiculous how biased people are on this site.
PSN is slower because PS3 doesn't support wireless n. PS4 however does, have a quick read of this article as it touches on that point. http://www.shacknews.com/ar...
Like that wasn't already been covered at the reveal back in Feb. And if you want a speedier download then don't select the option 'download in background' and see how much quicker you get those updates.
It took over half a day to download all the free games from PS+ when I first signed up.
I agree it can be improved, but were talking old tech here. Your computer is better in probably every way, minus a Blu-Ray player. It's like complaining that my 1986 Chevrolet Caprice doesn't go as fast as my Ferrari. The reason nobody is talking about this is because it's natural progression, I expected this in the next generation of consoles, and both of them did.
Hmm.. A 2 gig downloaded update for me on PS3 takes about 5-8 minutes on average at best. I don't know if it is something in the way you have your router set or not but my speed tests run about 40mbps download and 9 mbps upload on my computer and my PS3 is set as the primary through my router.
Mother of internet gods you probably have one of the shittiest internet connections. The only time firmware updates take long are when they are major firmware updates. Seems to me that, because you don't play teh gamez on your ps3 at all, you let your ps3 gain dust and newer firmware updates have been available, therefore taking you longer because you are on say for ex: on 3.0 and update to the latest version. That will take a long time for obvious reasons. And seriously who the hell buys a ps3 not to play games when it's the only console on the market that caters to the core? You probably don't own one or you're one of those COD people who think they're gamers.
People keep saying Xbox Live Gold isn't worth it, but here is one example of how awesome it is. On Xbox 360, MS limits the patch size so you don't have to sit around and a wait long time. Furthermore, they alleviate the wait time by allowing hot patching. What does that "hot patching" mean? It means, the game isn't stopped and rebooted. It means as soon as the download is complete it continues as if nothing ever happened. Xbox Live just signs you out and in, and bam you can play! The process is: a) insert games and start b) game checks if you have an update c) assuming there is one you get asked if you want to update d) you say yes, and the download starts while the game is running through the stupid logo screens and intros. e) the patch is downloaded, XBL signs you out and in, while the game is going through the start screens. Notice XBL doesn't apply the patch, it just literally signs you out and in and you are ready! f) bam play!!! This usually takes about a minute. A lot of times, the logo screens and intro takes far longer as I'm still stairing at it after the update is done. In short, this is essentially a feature Xbox 360 didn't even have, let alone wait for next generation. MS already solved it with current generation. This is why download sizes are limited, because it inconveniences the consumer. MS would rather inconvenience the developer so the user experience is as good as it can be.
@panda Agree mate. I wanted to play GT5 a few weeks ago for the first time in just over a year for an hour or so before I went out for the evening.. Granted that's a long time to have not played the game but I had to wait for the game to dl at least 13 updates. The first was over a gig and the rest were 250mb or so. It took so long I didn't get to play the game before I needed to go out so I left my PS3 running and it had finished when I got home. I know most games don't need that kind of number of patches but it was so painful to watch the system being so slow. Download, install, dl, install, dl, install ages, ages ages. The xbl servers and patching system is so much more considered and well implemented. I hope PS4 has a better infrastructure system especially if they charge a fee which I think they will. Oh and I live in UK and have 10meg broadband before anyone blames my net.
I can't believe this article got so popular, considering it's one feature that Xbox One also has. It's not like this gives PS4 any kind of advantage. There are many other features that do give it an edge that I think are more important. You know, like not requiring a camera to spy on you and that sort of thing.
I have no idea how you have so many disagrees. Turn on your playstation to lets say play GT5. Well if you haven't played your PS3 in a while... 20minutes to get the firmware. Then you insert your game... GT5 has humongous patches... Maybe a 3 hour wait if you are lucky. My PC rips through patches like they are a joke compared to the PS3. Hopefully this is solved with the PS4.
My Xbox360 updates take a matter of minutes. When I go to my friends house and play PS3, we will sit there, often for in excess of an hour, waiting for an update to come down. I usually sit there and make snide remarks like: ''ya know, if you had an Xbox...'' ;)
But that's how fast I download everything on the internet. My internet speeds are only 400KB, unfortunately. :(
Get a life?
The touch screen, am I right. Let me go read the article.
Err wrong you are the weakest link :P. @Below if they have no money how are they still in business??Talk about stupidity.
Sony has junk status rating and no money, it's the weakest link.
They are barely in business. Get it right num-nuts.
They are still in business because their other devisions are what's keeping them afloat.
It's an awesome feature, but there is nothing to really talk about regarding that matter, it's just seems like something that's just there (NOT saying it sucks!). It's awesome that you can play your game while it's downloading though! I think the feature nobody talks about is the touch pad. Everyone has been ignoring it, but I think it could be put to good use with puzzles and stuff.
Yes! I remember some of the bigger downloads that I had to go through before my PS3 got the YLOD (I ended up replacing it with a 360, something I've REALLY come to regret). Some of those downloads would literally take 40 minutes. However, I really want to here more about the Touch Pad.
I hated patching DC Universe on day one :( Was by far most annoying DL I have encountered so far.
People were talking about this. Someone was just not paying attention.
Sony stated that they have a secondary chip to handle back ground downloading and updates. So i doubt this will be a problem.
Ability To Sleep And Restart Is Awesome.