Is Kazunori setting people up for those who dont have internet?

  • Thread starter imaweirdo
  • 86 comments
  • 5,509 views
imaweirdo

imaweirdo

268
I'm seeing the mechanical damage patch but its only available to those who have internet connection to download it. Is Kaz on the path of setting up those people without internet to download the features that should have been in the final development? He did say more things coming our way.
 
Yep, if you have no access to Internet, you're stuck with version 1.01. In the future (when the game goes Platinum), new copy should have all the patch included on the disk. So if you have no access or no way to get connected to Internet whatsoever, the only way is to buy another copy later on.
 
Whether right or wrong people are expected to have internet probably more than a phone these days. I think companies are ok with upsetting the few that don't because it is so much more cost effective to do business online. Could you imagine if software companies had to put all their patches on disk and mail them to their customers? Cheaper just to write the customers off.
 
Uscbryan
Whether right or wrong people are expected to have internet probably more than a phone these days. I think companies are ok with upsetting the few that don't because it is so much more cost effective to do business online. Could you imagine if software companies had to put all their patches on disk and mail them to their customers? Cheaper just to write the customers off.
Click to expand...

I think it's very wrong. Many of us have internet and most of the people we know do so we feel it's the norm, but really it's not:

http://www.internetworldstats.com/top25.htm

Internet penetration is surprisingly low in many places and you have to remember that it's one thing to expect people to have it, it's another to sell what's basically a broken product and justify it by fixing it via internet thus leaving those who don't have it out.

I have been saying this for a long time (and getting much the same response that it's your fault if you don't have internet not theirs) and I see it very much a s a problem that it's somehow ok to fix problems with a game via internet patches.

The current one is arguably less of a problem because people without internet are only missing out on online damage.... which they can't use anyway. But it does bring up the question might single player damage be left out for fear of reprisle from non internet users feeling they got shafted?

Conversly we have actually seen a single player fix (although much lower profile) come out as it seems that the AI braking when you touch their bumper was reduced some in teh first patch. This was a huge problem for us at my friends house who has no internet as it ruins NASCAR.
 
I think if you can afford a ps3, brand new games for the said ps3, maybe even an HDTV, and you don't have internet? Then you need to get your priorities straight.
Well personally I think having internet is more important than gaming anyways..


And how can people stand there and complain about free updates to a game that has been released in to the market already.. it is not like you need the updates to play the game, and the developer is only trying to make the game better.
 
deviln3
I think if you can afford a ps3, brand new games for the said ps3, maybe even an HDTV, and you don't have internet? Then you need to get your priorities straight.
Well personally I think having internet is more important than gaming anyways..


And how can people stand there and complain about free updates to a game that has been released in to the market already.. it is not like you need the updates to play the game, and the developer is only trying to make the game better.
Click to expand...

This flawed logic has come up before also...

I personally know some families who are not well off and can afford a PS3 as a one time expense as it provides entertainment for their many family members but can't afford $40+ a month for broadband reasonably.

And as for getting priorities straight, why isn't selling a game that isn't broken and missing features the priority we are all worried about rather than the priority of making sure the consumer spends $$$ on an unrelated service just to maybe get all of what they were told would be in the box when they bought it?
 
Internet is fast making its way as a utility no different than electricity or phone.

I have long had internet baked into my budget as a communications cost.

Like said above, if you have a PS3, HDTV, and a new $60 game without having your utilities squared away, well, idunno. Availability is one thing, affordability is something else.

It is lame they sent out the game somewhat unfinished, but it was getting to be just too long for all parties involved I imagine. This shopping season had to happen for them.
 
The patches have only affected online play anyways, so if you can't play online these patches would do nothing for you. I can't speak for future patches though.
 
Devedander
I think it's very wrong. Many of us have internet and most of the people we know do so we feel it's the norm, but really it's not:

http://www.internetworldstats.com/top25.htm

Internet penetration is surprisingly low in many places and you have to remember that it's one thing to expect people to have it, it's another to sell what's basically a broken product and justify it by fixing it via internet thus leaving those who don't have it out.

I have been saying this for a long time (and getting much the same response that it's your fault if you don't have internet not theirs) and I see it very much a s a problem that it's somehow ok to fix problems with a game via internet patches.

The current one is arguably less of a problem because people without internet are only missing out on online damage.... which they can't use anyway. But it does bring up the question might single player damage be left out for fear of reprisle from non internet users feeling they got shafted?

Conversly we have actually seen a single player fix (although much lower profile) come out as it seems that the AI braking when you touch their bumper was reduced some in teh first patch. This was a huge problem for us at my friends house who has no internet as it ruins NASCAR.
Click to expand...

Internet has become like the cell phone; if you don't have one, you're stuck in the 90s (not everyone had cells then either, today even 5 year olds have one).
You have to have your priorities straight too, you shouldn't be having a PS3 if you don't even have internet access. The last great console of that era was the PS2, and even the internet it had on later wasn't all that important, I never had it and enjoyed all the games (of course GT4 was the most enjoyable).
 
Hmm, well much can be said that you can get your PS3 updated through using other means, Do they allow patches to be had the same way? Doubtful. Considering that you need a broadband connection to fully realize any of the new systems, buying a system without having the lowliest of broadband connections is a foolhardy decision. I'm wondering if PS3 games come with the latest system updates on the disc like PSP games do at the time of release of said game. As big as a Blu Ray is, this should be at least optional for those without internet connection, but I still think it's quite foolhardy to not have internet connection and own any of the current systems.

Ignorance on both ends, Sony assuming that most people who buy a PS3 would have a broadband internet connection and the consumer for not doing their homework before they spend their money. GT5 isn't the first game to have patches to fix bugs and/or broken bits of game, and it won't be the last. Having said that, how on earth did you without an internet connection get on here to start this thread, lol?

That's like buying a BMW and not expecting that upkeep of the car is going to be expensive...
 
airjoker88
Just go to a buddy's house that has internet, that's what i did!! :)

everyone knows someone with interwebz riggght?
Click to expand...
That's what I was going to say. While in all cases this isn't true, for most of us it seems to be.

I was wondering what the original poster was getting at with this. Undoubtedly like Turn 10 did with Froza, there will be a GT5 Platinum Edition released within a year or so with the updates and any DLC included.
 
It's a big stretch to say that everyone has a decent internet connection.

It's much less of a stretch to say that most people with a PS3 are connected to the internet.
 
Kru83
Dude, its not just Kaz every game maker uses patches for their games.
Click to expand...

I remember years ago when the internet made distributing patches feasible I argued that it was a bad thing and the slippery slope would one day lead to people expecting and rationlizing the release of unifinished products becuase "they can be patched".

I was told I was a whiner and it would never come to that, patches would only make things BETTER becuase "imagine what the agmes of the last few years would have been like if the devs could have relased patches for them!".

Well fast forward 10-15 years and look where we are :(

FlareKR
Internet has become like the cell phone; if you don't have one, you're stuck in the 90s (not everyone had cells then either, today even 5 year olds have one).
You have to have your priorities straight too, you shouldn't be having a PS3 if you don't even have internet access. The last great console of that era was the PS2, and even the internet it had on later wasn't all that important, I never had it and enjoyed all the games (of course GT4 was the most enjoyable).
Click to expand...

This is a poor excuse for a rationalization. First off many people still don't have cell phones and again, you shouldn't have to have some unrelated third party service to get the functionality advertised on the box. How ubiquitous that service is has nothing to do with it. It is the very basis of false advertising rules that you get it when you buy it, not that you CAN get it maybe after you have bought it assuming you have access to such and such popular service.

I know people who don't have phones, don't have cable TV, don't have internet etc etc etc and their $$$ are just as green as yours or mine. They should get the full product they paid for and it's not their fault if the product doesn't match the description.
 
Devedander
I remember years ago when the internet made distributing patches feasible I argued that it was a bad thing and the slippery slope would one day lead to people expecting and rationlizing the release of unifinished products becuase "they can be patched".

I was told I was a whiner and it would never come to that, patches would only make things BETTER becuase "imagine what the agmes of the last few years would have been like if the devs could have relased patches for them!".

Well fast forward 10-15 years and look where we are :(
Click to expand...

Do you want to go back to how it was before consoles were net connected? Unfinished games would be released all the time and they'd never, ever be fixed.

There have always been crappy, unfinished games. Now they don't have to stay that way. A game like Backbreaker came out and from the reviews and fans there was a list of issues / problems. The developers recently released a massive patch that took these concerns and improved the game drastically. In the past, they'd have to hope their "bad" game sells enough copies that they can fix it in a sequel. Now, they can fix it with a patch and this may lead to the success that could actually warrant that sequel.

And what about the good games? They'd forever have the content they shipped with. Criterion proved with Burnout Paradise that even a fully functional game can greatly benefit from post release support.

I just don't follow your argument at all, I think it's flawed at a pretty basic level.
 
Nope.

Check Forza 3: no single race and photomode without internet and gold account, no local leaderboard for hot lap without constant internet connection. The most interested cars are cut from the game (Legendary pack) and you should download them for some unknown reason.

And here we are talking about patches :)
 
I can't believe this hasn't been put here yet. It's the first thing I thought of when I read the topic:



A friend of mine doesn't have internet on his PS3 and we constantly have to bring the unit over to my house for updates and game patches. It's a bit annoying, but patches are a modern reality.
 
Geez what year are we living in? You're on the internet now posting on GTP are you not?Buy an axe, learn to chop, build a bridge and get over it. Sick of hearing people whinge about having to dload patches for the game, bunch of crybabies!
 
I wouldn't be surprised to see a GOTY edition later on with the updates and extra content, especially if GT6 is a long way off. Until then, all you can do is try to find someone with internet access.
 
tyl0r_r
Do you want to go back to how it was before consoles were net connected? Unfinished games would be released all the time and they'd never, ever be fixed.

There have always been crappy, unfinished games. Now they don't have to stay that way. A game like Backbreaker came out and from the reviews and fans there was a list of issues / problems. The developers recently released a massive patch that took these concerns and improved the game drastically. In the past, they'd have to hope their "bad" game sells enough copies that they can fix it in a sequel. Now, they can fix it with a patch and this may lead to the success that could actually warrant that sequel.

And what about the good games? They'd forever have the content they shipped with. Criterion proved with Burnout Paradise that even a fully functional game can greatly benefit from post release support.

I just don't follow your argument at all, I think it's flawed at a pretty basic level.
Click to expand...

You and I lived in much different worlds...

I remember very FEW unifinished games and usually they were heavily panned and sales hit hard as a result. I mean this was back in the day that the guy at the computer store actually knew about the game and could tell you if it was widely touted to suck.

I mean even big games like Full Throttle and 7th Guest were pretty solidly done... Xcom defense force, C&C... I am hard pressed to remember a game that I had that suffered from not being done and I do vaguely recall a few that weren't but everyone I knew avoided them like the plague.

I don't think your memory is correct.

Now don't get me wrong, good things come out of online updates and patches too... Valve is a great example of how to use online updates right.

The problem isn't the online connectivity and what it allows, it's the attitude people have been tricked into taking in which they defend bad treatment from game companies.

I mean look at this thread... a game is released half done and who gets blamed? The consumer for not having broad band?

WTF?

If a car go sold and it didn't have an AC but he manufacturer said "just drive your trailer over and we will load one up for you" would you blame the car buyer for not having a trailer? No you would blame the car company for lying about the AC being in the car in the first place...

Yet somehow we have been sheepled into blaming each other for the game companies screw ups...

Lillee
Geez what year are we living in? You're on the internet now posting on GTP are you not?Buy an axe, learn to chop, build a bridge and get over it. Sick of hearing people whinge about having to dload patches for the game, bunch of crybabies!
Click to expand...

I have broadband and I get the updates fast and easily... so it's not a thing for me. The problem is you have to look at whether what's happening is right/wrong/good/bad in the whole, not just whether it affects you. The problem is if everyone only cares about what affects them, when it affects you, no one help stand up for you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...
 
The current generation of consoles that allow patching has been a massive step for developers, it gives us a greater opportunity to make marketing deadlines, which ultimately decide whether the project is successful or a complete failure.

I think it's hard on those who don't have internet access, be it their own or through a third party, but that's the way the industry is moving forward. Not everyone can afford HDTV's, should devs not utilise the market of gamers that do?

Games are long beyond being about one type of gamer, each game will have several different types of gamer that it appeals to, that uses it.

There seems to be a notion that it allows devs to be more lax in their approach, this is wholly untrue, the development process isn't cut and dry, when deadlines are made, it's not a 100% certainty that they will be met, like in any business. The patching system in modern gaming allows for features to be added or improved which would have otherwise been scrapped or delayed for the next iteration. How is that a bad thing? It gives people more time with a product they enjoy and gives the developer a customer who is more likely to buy another one of their games again.

In most decisions in business, someone will always lose out. The Internet is such a huge tool that its growth within society has outgrown the ability of some countries/regions to make it a part of the infrastructure. It's a bit of sods law for some, but for others it is huge and the internet will only continue to expand, though I think purely digital gaming is a long way off as most gamers still prefer to use CDs.
 
Sureboss
The current generation of consoles that allow patching has been a massive step for developers, it gives us a greater opportunity to make marketing deadlines, which ultimately decide whether the project is successful or a complete failure.
Click to expand...

This is exactly the problem... what defines a success in the business world is now whether you can hit that arbitrary deadline, not whether you have created a polished finished product.

The exact point I am making: success is now about how well it suits the business now, no longer the consumer. And somehow the average consumer has been brainwashed into defending that position.

I think it's hard on those who don't have internet access, be it their own or through a third party, but that's the way the industry is moving forward. Not everyone can afford HDTV's, should devs not utilise the market of gamers that do?
Click to expand...

You do realize that pretty much every game released is tested to be functional and operational on a non HDTV right for exactly that reason right?

Games are long beyond being about one type of gamer, each game will have several different types of gamer that it appeals to, that uses it.
Click to expand...

Sure, and every person likes a different car... but a car that says "AC" but has no AC is not complete no matter who it is they are selling it to now is it? Having a diverse consumer base does not excuse incomplete product.

There seems to be a notion that it allows devs to be more lax in their approach, this is wholly untrue, the development process isn't cut and dry, when deadlines are made, it's not a 100% certainty that they will be met, like in any business.
Click to expand...

You are right, it does not allow devs to be lax, but the problem is the goal is no longer a qulaity product for the consumer... as you say it's no the deadline for the business.

Once again, the consumer interest comes in behind the business interest... and yet this situation is defended by so many consumers...

The patching system in modern gaming allows for features to be added or improved which would have otherwise been scrapped or delayed for the next iteration. How is that a bad thing? It gives people more time with a product they enjoy and gives the developer a customer who is more likely to buy another one of their games again.
Click to expand...

Or the other way to view it is that it allows for businesses to rationlize unrealistic deadlines for projects since they always have the excuse "we'll fix it with a patch". Let me ask you, honestly, how many games can you list that really released something valuable and positive via a patch (not talking DLC, just put it out there) vs how many that have patches to fix things that really should have been caught in testing?

I can think of BFBC2 and TF2 of the top of my head. You go ahead.

Again, this is the exact argument that was put forth when internet based patching (and especially day 1 patching) first came around, it was flawed then and it is now.

In most decisions in business, someone will always lose out.
Click to expand...

I agree but only because consumers in general have become weak sheeple who will not stand up for themselves and instead excuse and rationlize being screwed over by businesses. In this situation it would be hard for the consumer NOT to loose out.

But it's far from a rule of business... in fact business deals can and often are mutually beneficial.

The Internet is such a huge tool that its growth within society has outgrown the ability of some countries/regions to make it a part of the infrastructure. It's a bit of sods law for some, but for others it is huge and the internet will only continue to expand, though I think purely digital gaming is a long way off as most gamers still prefer to use CDs.
Click to expand...

True but I am not sure what that has to do with this topic.
 
Devedander
You and I lived in much different worlds...

I remember very FEW unifinished games and usually they were heavily panned and sales hit hard as a result. I mean this was back in the day that the guy at the computer store actually knew about the game and could tell you if it was widely touted to suck.

I mean even big games like Full Throttle and 7th Guest were pretty solidly done... Xcom defense force, C&C... I am hard pressed to remember a game that I had that suffered from not being done and I do vaguely recall a few that weren't but everyone I knew avoided them like the plague.

I don't think your memory is correct.
Click to expand...

Well you don't remember them because you have decent taste in games. You and your friends knew enough to avoid them. But somewhere, some kid got Shaq-Fu or Superman 64 for Christmas.

Yeah these broken crappy games had bad sales and were panned. That's what I meant in the Backbreaker example. It had mixed reviews and fans saw problems. They patched it and essentially fixed the game, making the best of things and making enough people take notice of them that now they may be successful enough to try again in a sequel. Without patches, these things don't happen, and Shaq-Fu stays Shaq-Fu.

Please don't make me compile a list of essentially flawed games that were basically betas that I played through on virtually every home console since Atari was making them.

Oh yeah, that reminds me, E.T. for the Atari was a massively hyped, unfinished, buggy, garbage-y mess that almost killed the entire video game industry in the early 80s. I had a copy, ugh. Too bad they couldn't patch it.

Take a look at the back of the GT5 box and look at all the online stuff advertised. Multiplayer, Leaderboards, Lobbies/Matchmaking, Add On Content... As a consumer, I'm not all that surprised that without an internet connection I'm not getting the full experience. Hard to get that Add On Content that they tell you about right on the box without a net connection, but I don't think that should be a surprise to any reasonable consumer. I'm not sure that patches fall under some unique category.

You don't get the full experience with today's generation of games unless you have an HDTV (3DTV now) but does that mean people with a standard TV should be surprised or upset that they're missing out? I see the internet thing the same way - it's not up to Sony what you don't have access to.
 
Last edited:
Devedander
And as for getting priorities straight, why isn't selling a game that isn't broken and missing features the priority we are all worried about rather than the priority of making sure the consumer spends $$$ on an unrelated service just to maybe get all of what they were told would be in the box when they bought it?
Click to expand...


First of all the game isnt broken. Fallout NV is broken.
 
Last edited:

Latest Posts

Back