ah man! Out then...for now!
This game was so good but fuck me it was short, did everything you could do in it within 2 days
My point is that I posted my opinion on a discussion board.
...a physical tax?- Paid Upgrade (U$10) for current-gen owners of the game – Free upgrade for those who bought the current-gen Digital Deluxe Edition
might as well wait for the Switch Pro. otherwise it'll be Travis Strikes Again/Yoshi all over againHey devs, 60 fps on Switch or bust. At least offer it as a performance mode.
Why charge $10 for Tony Hawk when it's mostly performance changes? They're offering Crash 4 for free and It's already confirmed to get texture and lighting improvements with the performance boost.Are people actually complaining about $10 Jesus I can't
I'm in for the PS5 version, instant loading times alone is worthwhile, higher res is great too. Surprised they actually did 120fps.
These games were made with the PS4/Xbox One in mind. They already gotta downgrade resolution and lots of assets to barely hit native res and 30fps on Switch. Can't recall many games this graphically intensive getting a Switch port to have 60fps. You're not seeing 60fps games like Doom, Persona 5 Strikers, Crash 4, etc keep 60fps on Switch.Hey devs, 60 fps on Switch or bust. At least offer it as a performance mode.
I mean, with other companies spoil their userbases, inconsistent upgrades across all versions, and helmed by Bobby "I don't pay taxes and also in Jeffery Epstein's Black Book" Kotick, it starts to add up in the disgruntlement.
Let's be real though, for 90% of the posters it has nothing to do with it beyond the first thing. It's just an "I'm entitled to it for free" mentality, doing it for one game doesn't mean it should be done for all others. companies giving free upgrades is great. I'd obviously prefer it. But it's never something I feel like I deserve.I mean, with other companies spoil their userbases, inconsistent upgrades across all versions, and helmed by Bobby "I don't pay taxes and also in Jeffery Epstein's Black Book" Kotick, it starts to add up in the disgruntlement.
Looking at the upgrade details, it seems like it'll give you the deluxe edition for $10 more, and when the game launched I believe the standard edition was $40.
I can understand not wanting to pay tho.
yep, if you bought the digital deluxe version when the game launched.
You get the upgrade for free
If you didn't : you just pay the difference.
That's pretty reasonable isn't it? A better scenario than Control.
I'd say so, someone had to rip off the "upgrade fee bandage" eventually, and how could we not be surprised it was Activision? This is a much better situation than Control, I would much rather have previous gen games have a $10-20 upgrade cost than being completely re-released for $40-70.yep, if you bought the digital deluxe version when the game launched.
You get the upgrade for free
If you didn't : you just pay the difference.
That's pretty reasonable isn't it? A better scenario than Control.
Tony Hawk is being completely re-released for Xbox disc owners for $50!I'd say so, someone had to rip off the "upgrade fee bandage" eventually, and how could we not be surprised it was Activision? This is a much better situation than Control, I would much rather have previous gen games have a $10-20 upgrade cost than being completely re-released for $40-70.
I can't even begin to understand why that is happening considering so many other games can do this without issue, not to mention PS4 disc owners can do this. Obviously if they wanted they could have just re-released it on both consoles without offering a free upgrade, it doesn't make sense to only offer it on one platform unless there is some behind the scenes issue with that process for the Xbox version.Tony Hawk is being completely re-released for Xbox disc owners for $50!
Sure. Unless you bought it on disc on Xbox and then it's equally bad. Fortunately I didn't buy it physically but I feel for Xbox peeps who did.yep, if you bought the digital deluxe version when the game launched.
You get the upgrade for free
If you didn't : you just pay the difference.
That's pretty reasonable isn't it? A better scenario than Control.
This game was so good but fuck me it was short, did everything you could do in it within 2 days
Really? I remember putting 100s of hours into 2 back in the day.
Getting all the gaps was particularly arduous, is that not in it?
Were these games 60fps on PS1? I'll still bite either way, though I am curious.I was considering double dipping on Switch, but Tony Hawk at 30fps a big no from me.
So glad to finally get to play these games. I wasn't big into skating as a kid, so it just kind of flew under my radar. Always curious, though.
Were these games 60fps on PS1? I'll still bite either way, though I am curious.
Seems like a pretty good deal! Compare that to Pikmin 3 remaster on Switch for example, where you pay 200 cents a frame.10 bucks for 60 more frames? Thats like more than 16 cents a frame.
There are very few games that deserve 120fps more than Tony Hawk. Its damn near the pinnacle of player input and precision.Seems like a pretty good deal! Compare that to Pikmin 3 remaster on Switch for example, where you pay 200 cents a frame.
And yeah, I think this game could really benefit from 120fps.
This always seems like a weird way to be reductive about the changes:It's not the ten dollars. It's the principle of it. Paying any money at all for a patch which basically changes the resolution and fps values in the config file is absurd. It could be two dollars and it would still be hilariously lame. The fact that the game is only five months old and that dozens of other games got PS5 upgrades for free just makes it look even worse. Don't get me wrong: Activision is free to ask whatever they wish for the upgrade... but we as consumers are equally as free to tell them to fuck off and take a pass on it.