This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

reality check, PS3 gamers. it takes about $40,000 to patch PS3 games.

  • Topic Archived
  1. Boards
  2. PlayStation 3
  3. reality check, PS3 gamers. it takes about $40,000 to patch PS3 games.

User Info: xenosaga123

xenosaga123
4 years ago#1
Yea, it's not cheap, so I think people should be thankful everytime a PS3 game is patched, since none of that money is coming out of your wallet and $60 is nothing compared to $40,000 http://mp1st.com/2012/02/14/a-patch-costs-40000-on-xbox-360-and-ps3/

User Info: backguard222

backguard222
4 years ago#2
Isn't the first one free?

User Info: Video_Game_Czar

Video_Game_Czar
4 years ago#3
FUN FACT: If they weren't lazy jag offs and play tested their games, They won't need to patch them post-launch.
PSN: VideoGameCzar l XBL: VideoGameCzar l Steam: TheVideoGameCzar

User Info: Large_Tonberry

Large_Tonberry
4 years ago#4
$40,000 is nothing to a publisher. It's the smaller developers and indie studios that are most affected by it. That's why Steam is such an enticing platform for developers.

User Info: yankee6903

yankee6903
4 years ago#5
Good, it thins the herd.
PSN: nightshade6903 GT:nightshade6903
I am not a Republican or a Democrat, I am a conservative

User Info: Nmilek1

Nmilek1
4 years ago#6
yankee6903 posted...
Good, it thins the herd.


If you thinned the herd all you would have to pick between is EA, Ubisoft and Activision ENJOY!

User Info: JerichoDarkstar

JerichoDarkstar
4 years ago#7
Nmilek1 posted...
yankee6903 posted...
Good, it thins the herd.


If you thinned the herd all you would have to pick between is EA, Ubisoft and Activision ENJOY!


Ubisoft is good. But EA and Activision. . . gawd you gave me an awful nightmare about them being the only developers on the planet!
I'll make a big enough ruckus for everyone.
PSN: DarkSilverCloud
#8
(message deleted)

User Info: yankee6903

yankee6903
4 years ago#9
Nmilek1 posted...
yankee6903 posted...
Good, it thins the herd.


If you thinned the herd all you would have to pick between is EA, Ubisoft and Activision ENJOY!


By thinning the herd I mean the number of patches. IE if it was free or cheap there would be hundreds of patches. We would spend all day DL patches. With this they only do critical ones, or at least bundle them into one update.

Look at it this way. You really want something and its only $1. But the line is two miles long. If they charged $20 then I guarantee that line will be short.
PSN: nightshade6903 GT:nightshade6903
I am not a Republican or a Democrat, I am a conservative

User Info: regsantotomas

regsantotomas
4 years ago#10
Video_Game_Czar posted...
FUN FACT: If they weren't lazy jag offs and play tested their games, They won't need to patch them post-launch.


That was neither fun nor a fact; mostly conjecture actually.

Software (not just games) ship with bugs all the time.

The issue is that there are project constraints including meeting budget and schedules that often result in deferral of said bugs. Certainly, there are teams that can and do a better job identifying more serious issues earlier and addressing them.

This has little to do with a lack of testing or laziness.
the bitter truth is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. ~ Anton Ego
  1. Boards
  2. PlayStation 3
  3. reality check, PS3 gamers. it takes about $40,000 to patch PS3 games.

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived