Where should I place my anger? (Bethesda/Sony)

[Jfswift]

I would like to comment that Fallout 3 will unfreeze itself if you're on the PS3 version. It still sucks that you have to wait but I've found that if you wait for like a half hour and go off to do something else and come back, eventually the game will (slowly) come back to life, long enough to save and reset it anyway. This has happened to me twice, both times after playing for about 5-7 hours at a time.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Sony marketed a "next gen system" back in 2005, and it's not capable of playing all the next gen games.

Just because Bethesda isn't competent enough to make their games run well on the PS3 doesn't mean that companies like Naughty Dog can't do it.

You are comparing Naughty Dog to Bethesda?

Naughty Dogs Uncharted series is a linear game, especially compared to Skyrims open world format.

A better example would be Rockstars GTA4, but even that pales in comparison to the sheer amount of crap that is in Skyrims game-world.

 

[Epona]

Sony marketed a "next gen system" back in 2005, and it's not capable of playing all the next gen games.

Just because Bethesda isn't competent enough to make their games run well on the PS3 doesn't mean that companies like Naughty Dog can't do it.

You are comparing Naughty Dog to Bethesda?

Naughty Dogs Uncharted series is a linear game, especially compared to Skyrims open world format.

A better example would be Rockstars GTA4, but even that pales in comparison to the sheer amount of crap that is in Skyrims game-world.

I think you missed that point. I was addressing this idiotic statement:

Sony marketed a "next gen system" back in 2005, and it's not capable of playing all the next gen games.

I mean, who bought a PS3 thinking they could play every HD game (from this gen) in existence? I mean shit, who thought they would be playing Halo 3 on the PS3?

 

[Signa]

Sony marketed a "next gen system" back in 2005, and it's not capable of playing all the next gen games.

Just because Bethesda isn't competent enough to make their games run well on the PS3 doesn't mean that companies like Naughty Dog can't do it.

You can't compare them, because Naughty Dog doesn't make games for other systems. We don't know what Uncharted would look like on the Xbox or the PC. They are also owned by Sony, so their company is used to working with the strange architecture of the PS3. That can't be expected of all the companies out there, so it's also part of Sony's fault for making the PS3 to be weird.

You don't know what Uncharted would look like on the 360, for all you know the 360 can't run it at all.

Which makes your point doubly invalid if we're not making apples to apples comparisons. Try again.

Look, you seem to be thinking I'm shitting on the PS3 for some personal fanboy vendetta. That is false. As far as I'm concerned, the PS3 is a capable system, just that Bethesda was too ambitious to try to put the game on that system. My point stands that they were able to get it to function on one set of hardware, and not another. That other set of hardware has some severe limitations by today's standards of hardware. Whether you think faulting Sony for that is unfair is none of my concern. They built and designed it, and they haven't replaced it with a new standard while encouraging game companies to continue to develop for it. They take part of the blame for the OP. That's my final word.

 

[Defenestra]

Eh. I'm kind of annoyed with Bethesda for the buggines of their games (I play on PC, and Skyrim seemed to be much less buggy than previous titles), but there's only so much you can do when you are trying to build the kind of games they do. These worlds are effing huge, theres lots of things in them, loads of people to interact with, ultiple questlines with interactions they need to keep an eye on. That Sony's console architecture makes life needlessly difficult for devs (I say needlessly because their competition is more helpful, though at this point the PS3 hardware architecture can hardly be a surprise to devs) just makes it more difficult to get a game working right.

Also consider the number of things that a person can attempt in these games, and contrast that with the amount of testing time a company has. Every day a game is tested before release is a stack of money, and that a huge stack of bugs will appear after launch as the game is unleashed in to the wold does not stop being a thing that will happen. All they can really do is hunt down the worst of the ones they can find and be ready to patch.

Also, keep in mind that the patching process is sometimes compplicated further by tyhe console company. Just as every piece of software you want to sell as officially for a given console has to pass certification, so too does every patch. It's not pointless obstruction on the part of the console company, either, if they just let anything through, and something goes horribly (or hilariously, depending on your perspective) wrong, then someone is liable and it's them.

 

[Epona]

Sony marketed a "next gen system" back in 2005, and it's not capable of playing all the next gen games.

Just because Bethesda isn't competent enough to make their games run well on the PS3 doesn't mean that companies like Naughty Dog can't do it.

You can't compare them, because Naughty Dog doesn't make games for other systems. We don't know what Uncharted would look like on the Xbox or the PC. They are also owned by Sony, so their company is used to working with the strange architecture of the PS3. That can't be expected of all the companies out there, so it's also part of Sony's fault for making the PS3 to be weird.

You don't know what Uncharted would look like on the 360, for all you know the 360 can't run it at all.

Which makes your point doubly invalid if we're not making apples to apples comparisons. Try again.

Look, you seem to be thinking I'm shitting on the PS3 for some personal fanboy vendetta. That is false. As far as I'm concerned, the PS3 is a capable system, just that Bethesda was too ambitious to try to put the game on that system. My point stands that they were able to get it to function on one set of hardware, and not another. That other set of hardware has some severe limitations by today's standards of hardware. Whether you think faulting Sony for that is unfair is none of my concern. They built and designed it, and they haven't replaced it with a new standard while encouraging game companies to continue to develop for it. They take part of the blame for the OP. That's my final word.

The PS3 is quite capable, it's Bethesda who isn't. Their games are legendary for being buggy and modders have to fix their shit for them on PC. Using Bethesda's incompetence to say "the PS3 is badly designed" is ridiculous.

 

[SadisticFire]

Yeah I think Sony is more at fault here due to how their system runs, rather then Besethda being lazy. I would say you're at fault, but I wouldn't look into a game that deep into until it was much to late myself either.

Sony is at fault because Bethesda makes buggy games? Only on PC can modders fix their shit.

It's their OS, and hardware. Like some one said before in this post, they devide chunks into 256 bits, which isn't bad for most games, but for Skyrim, where everything needs to be happening cause it's a large, free roam game, with tons of objective interacting, it's a big load on it. It wouldn't be bad if there were say, small rooms with low amounts of interactive objects with loading screens in between them.

Though I won't lie and say I may be slightly bias for Besethda

 

[Epona]

Yeah I think Sony is more at fault here due to how their system runs, rather then Besethda being lazy. I would say you're at fault, but I wouldn't look into a game that deep into until it was much to late myself either.

Sony is at fault because Bethesda makes buggy games? Only on PC can modders fix their shit.

It's their OS, and hardware. Like some one said before in this post, they devide chunks into 256 bits, which isn't bad for most games, but for Skyrim, where everything needs to be happening cause it's a large, free roam game, with tons of objective interacting, it's a big load on it. It wouldn't be bad if there were say, small rooms with low amounts of interactive objects with loading screens in between them.

Though I won't lie and say I may be slightly bias for Besethda

It is up to developers to make their games work well on the target hardware OR don't release it at all. Did the PS3 specs change after 5 years on the market?

 

[SadisticFire]

Yeah I think Sony is more at fault here due to how their system runs, rather then Besethda being lazy. I would say you're at fault, but I wouldn't look into a game that deep into until it was much to late myself either.

Sony is at fault because Bethesda makes buggy games? Only on PC can modders fix their shit.

It's their OS, and hardware. Like some one said before in this post, they devide chunks into 256 bits, which isn't bad for most games, but for Skyrim, where everything needs to be happening cause it's a large, free roam game, with tons of objective interacting, it's a big load on it. It wouldn't be bad if there were say, small rooms with low amounts of interactive objects with loading screens in between them.

Though I won't lie and say I may be slightly bias for Besethda

It is up to developers to make their games work well on the target hardware OR don't release it at all. Did the PS3 specs change after 5 years on the market?

SO instead of releasing a buggy game for those only with the PS3, they don't release the game at all, and they make zero profit from those that only have PS3, and the fans are more likely to be even more upset for the lack of Skyrim on the PS3. It doesn't exactly sound like a good business strategy. Yes, they should try and make not buggy, but that would be difficult. I have a very bad analogy, though an analogy.

PS3 is like a vending machine, but instead of 2 dollar soda, it sells... I don't know, two hundred dollar goods. Because it's a vending machine, it only accepts quarters. So Besethda has to put in those quarters, to get the goods. It takes a long time, and sometimes mistakes happen, maybe a wrong coin.

Not the best analogy though, I'm sure others can come up with better. Please do, if you wanna.

 

[Signa]

I think you missed that point. I was addressing this idiotic statement:

Sony marketed a "next gen system" back in 2005, and it's not capable of playing all the next gen games.

I mean, who bought a PS3 thinking they could play every HD game (from this gen) in existence? I mean shit, who thought they would be playing Halo 3 on the PS3?

Who...wha? Dude, I'm not writing a fucking bill to be signed into law here! Ok, have it your way. "...next gen *multiplatform* games" Are you happy yet? FUCK!

Using Bethesda's incompetence to say "the PS3 is badly designed" is ridiculous.

Ok, Mr Sony Defense Force, I said I'm done, but you're still pushing. Time to drop the pretense of mature conversation because you're not capable of that. So to your final comment I say "Nuh-uh! You're ridiculous!"

Off Topic: Jesus Christ! This is the second not-pro-Sony comment I've made this week, and I keep getting harassed for it. What the hell has Sony done to create this kind of fandom?

 

[Epona]

Yeah I think Sony is more at fault here due to how their system runs, rather then Besethda being lazy. I would say you're at fault, but I wouldn't look into a game that deep into until it was much to late myself either.

Sony is at fault because Bethesda makes buggy games? Only on PC can modders fix their shit.

It's their OS, and hardware. Like some one said before in this post, they devide chunks into 256 bits, which isn't bad for most games, but for Skyrim, where everything needs to be happening cause it's a large, free roam game, with tons of objective interacting, it's a big load on it. It wouldn't be bad if there were say, small rooms with low amounts of interactive objects with loading screens in between them.

Though I won't lie and say I may be slightly bias for Besethda

It is up to developers to make their games work well on the target hardware OR don't release it at all. Did the PS3 specs change after 5 years on the market?

SO instead of releasing a buggy game for those only with the PS3, they don't release the game at all, and they make zero profit from those that only have PS3, and the fans are more likely to be even more upset for the lack of Skyrim on the PS3. It doesn't exactly sound like a good business strategy. Yes, they should try and make not buggy, but that would be difficult. I have a very bad analogy, though an analogy.

PS3 is like a vending machine, but instead of 2 dollar soda, it sells... I don't know, two hundred dollar goods. Because it's a vending machine, it only accepts quarters. So Besethda has to put in those quarters, to get the goods. It takes a long time, and sometimes mistakes happen, maybe a wrong coin.

Not the best analogy though, I'm sure others can come up with better. Please do, if you wanna.

It makes me sick to see people say "better to make profit by releasing a buggy game than not to release it at all". PS3 is not a vending machine.

 

[Epona]

I think you missed that point. I was addressing this idiotic statement:

Sony marketed a "next gen system" back in 2005, and it's not capable of playing all the next gen games.

I mean, who bought a PS3 thinking they could play every HD game (from this gen) in existence? I mean shit, who thought they would be playing Halo 3 on the PS3?

Who...wha? Dude, I'm not writing a fucking bill to be signed into law here! Ok, have it your way. "...next gen *multiplatform* games" Are you happy yet? FUCK!

Using Bethesda's incompetence to say "the PS3 is badly designed" is ridiculous.

Ok, Mr Sony Defense Force, I said I'm done, but you're still pushing. Time to drop the pretense of mature conversation because you're not capable of that. So to your final comment I say "Nuh-uh! You're ridiculous!"

Off Topic: Jesus Christ! This is the second not-pro-Sony comment I've made this week, and I keep getting harassed for it. What the hell has Sony done to create this kind of fandom?

So uh, what mulitplat games can't run on the PS3?

You weren't having a mature conversation in the first place. I mean look at this quote again:

Sony marketed a "next gen system" back in 2005, and it's not capable of playing all the next gen games.

 

[SadisticFire]

Yeah I think Sony is more at fault here due to how their system runs, rather then Besethda being lazy. I would say you're at fault, but I wouldn't look into a game that deep into until it was much to late myself either.

Sony is at fault because Bethesda makes buggy games? Only on PC can modders fix their shit.

It's their OS, and hardware. Like some one said before in this post, they devide chunks into 256 bits, which isn't bad for most games, but for Skyrim, where everything needs to be happening cause it's a large, free roam game, with tons of objective interacting, it's a big load on it. It wouldn't be bad if there were say, small rooms with low amounts of interactive objects with loading screens in between them.

Though I won't lie and say I may be slightly bias for Besethda

It is up to developers to make their games work well on the target hardware OR don't release it at all. Did the PS3 specs change after 5 years on the market?

SO instead of releasing a buggy game for those only with the PS3, they don't release the game at all, and they make zero profit from those that only have PS3, and the fans are more likely to be even more upset for the lack of Skyrim on the PS3. It doesn't exactly sound like a good business strategy. Yes, they should try and make not buggy, but that would be difficult. I have a very bad analogy, though an analogy.

PS3 is like a vending machine, but instead of 2 dollar soda, it sells... I don't know, two hundred dollar goods. Because it's a vending machine, it only accepts quarters. So Besethda has to put in those quarters, to get the goods. It takes a long time, and sometimes mistakes happen, maybe a wrong coin.

Not the best analogy though, I'm sure others can come up with better. Please do, if you wanna.

It makes me sick to see people say "better to make profit by releasing a buggy game than not to release it at all". PS3 is not a vending machine.

They arn't working for charity, I'm sure the devs would love to be working for charity, but they need food, they need to pay taxes, they need to pay for their families. It's not bad that they want a profit, and it's not exactly that they want the profit, it's more of they NEED the profit, or else they can't make another game. And that's not the whole part, what about those that didn't have any other platform, would they be happier without the game entirely?
Also, I'm aware PS3 isn't a vending machine, it was an analogy.

 

[Epona]

Yeah I think Sony is more at fault here due to how their system runs, rather then Besethda being lazy. I would say you're at fault, but I wouldn't look into a game that deep into until it was much to late myself either.

Sony is at fault because Bethesda makes buggy games? Only on PC can modders fix their shit.

It's their OS, and hardware. Like some one said before in this post, they devide chunks into 256 bits, which isn't bad for most games, but for Skyrim, where everything needs to be happening cause it's a large, free roam game, with tons of objective interacting, it's a big load on it. It wouldn't be bad if there were say, small rooms with low amounts of interactive objects with loading screens in between them.

Though I won't lie and say I may be slightly bias for Besethda

It is up to developers to make their games work well on the target hardware OR don't release it at all. Did the PS3 specs change after 5 years on the market?

SO instead of releasing a buggy game for those only with the PS3, they don't release the game at all, and they make zero profit from those that only have PS3, and the fans are more likely to be even more upset for the lack of Skyrim on the PS3. It doesn't exactly sound like a good business strategy. Yes, they should try and make not buggy, but that would be difficult. I have a very bad analogy, though an analogy.

PS3 is like a vending machine, but instead of 2 dollar soda, it sells... I don't know, two hundred dollar goods. Because it's a vending machine, it only accepts quarters. So Besethda has to put in those quarters, to get the goods. It takes a long time, and sometimes mistakes happen, maybe a wrong coin.

Not the best analogy though, I'm sure others can come up with better. Please do, if you wanna.

It makes me sick to see people say "better to make profit by releasing a buggy game than not to release it at all". PS3 is not a vending machine.

They arn't working for charity, I'm sure the devs would love to be working for charity, but they need food, they need to pay taxes, they need to pay for their families. It's not bad that they want a profit, and it's not exactly that they want the profit, it's more of they NEED the profit, or else they can't make another game. And that's not the whole part, what about those that didn't have any other platform, would they be happier without the game entirely?
Also, I'm aware PS3 isn't a vending machine, it was an analogy.

You need to quit with the analogies and I think you missed my point. I'll clarify.

As a consumer you should care more about getting a quality product than Bethesda's profit.

 

[Epona]

You should blame yourself--for not buying these games for the PC when any other sensible person would have.

So the millions of people who bought the game on consoles are not sensible?

 

[Leon Gartland]

Why do a lot of people blame the PS3?
Bethesda have and always have been sloppy with making games. I do love their games but they are always prone to bugs I have never had a problem with of their games on the PS3 but many people have.

Games such as Far Cry 3, Borderlands 1+2, and more had no problems even with the PS3 design. So why should Bethesda? Sony had to help Bethesda so they where able to release the DLC and not long after the DLC is getting released so more Bethesda's fault as much more demanding games play fine.

 

[PhunkyPhazon]

Honestly, I can't even imagine playing Skyrim on a console. *shields self from thrown rocks* WHOA HOLD UP HEAR ME OUT. I'm not some elitist, snobby PC gamer who thinks console gaming is for casuals or whatever. If I was unable to run it on my computer (which believe me, it just barely meets minimum requirements), I'd be playing it on my PS3 too. It's just...the mods. OMG the mods. They add so much flavor and variety, and some of them are so good and handy that I can't see myself playing the game without them. Playing this on a console would mean no Amazing Follower Tweaks, no Moonpath to Elswheyr, no Live Another Life, no camping or survival mods, no way to craft my own arrows (seriously, why isn't that already in the vanilla game?)...just plain ol' Skyrim, warts and all.

 

[SadisticFire]

Yeah I think Sony is more at fault here due to how their system runs, rather then Besethda being lazy. I would say you're at fault, but I wouldn't look into a game that deep into until it was much to late myself either.

Sony is at fault because Bethesda makes buggy games? Only on PC can modders fix their shit.

It's their OS, and hardware. Like some one said before in this post, they devide chunks into 256 bits, which isn't bad for most games, but for Skyrim, where everything needs to be happening cause it's a large, free roam game, with tons of objective interacting, it's a big load on it. It wouldn't be bad if there were say, small rooms with low amounts of interactive objects with loading screens in between them.

Though I won't lie and say I may be slightly bias for Besethda

It is up to developers to make their games work well on the target hardware OR don't release it at all. Did the PS3 specs change after 5 years on the market?

SO instead of releasing a buggy game for those only with the PS3, they don't release the game at all, and they make zero profit from those that only have PS3, and the fans are more likely to be even more upset for the lack of Skyrim on the PS3. It doesn't exactly sound like a good business strategy. Yes, they should try and make not buggy, but that would be difficult. I have a very bad analogy, though an analogy.

PS3 is like a vending machine, but instead of 2 dollar soda, it sells... I don't know, two hundred dollar goods. Because it's a vending machine, it only accepts quarters. So Besethda has to put in those quarters, to get the goods. It takes a long time, and sometimes mistakes happen, maybe a wrong coin.

Not the best analogy though, I'm sure others can come up with better. Please do, if you wanna.

It makes me sick to see people say "better to make profit by releasing a buggy game than not to release it at all". PS3 is not a vending machine.

They arn't working for charity, I'm sure the devs would love to be working for charity, but they need food, they need to pay taxes, they need to pay for their families. It's not bad that they want a profit, and it's not exactly that they want the profit, it's more of they NEED the profit, or else they can't make another game. And that's not the whole part, what about those that didn't have any other platform, would they be happier without the game entirely?
Also, I'm aware PS3 isn't a vending machine, it was an analogy.

You need to quit with the analogies and I think you missed my point. I'll clarify.

As a consumer you should care more about getting a quality product than Bethesda's profit.

I did get a quality product, I didn't buy it on the PS3. And with foresight, I would want to support a developer that has made me favorite games, and I would want them to make future games, even though they had a small hiccup.

Post Script:
As well as getting a product at all. I would rather have a product, then have no product, even if it's buggy.

 

[Epona]

Yeah I think Sony is more at fault here due to how their system runs, rather then Besethda being lazy. I would say you're at fault, but I wouldn't look into a game that deep into until it was much to late myself either.

Sony is at fault because Bethesda makes buggy games? Only on PC can modders fix their shit.

It's their OS, and hardware. Like some one said before in this post, they devide chunks into 256 bits, which isn't bad for most games, but for Skyrim, where everything needs to be happening cause it's a large, free roam game, with tons of objective interacting, it's a big load on it. It wouldn't be bad if there were say, small rooms with low amounts of interactive objects with loading screens in between them.

Though I won't lie and say I may be slightly bias for Besethda

It is up to developers to make their games work well on the target hardware OR don't release it at all. Did the PS3 specs change after 5 years on the market?

SO instead of releasing a buggy game for those only with the PS3, they don't release the game at all, and they make zero profit from those that only have PS3, and the fans are more likely to be even more upset for the lack of Skyrim on the PS3. It doesn't exactly sound like a good business strategy. Yes, they should try and make not buggy, but that would be difficult. I have a very bad analogy, though an analogy.

PS3 is like a vending machine, but instead of 2 dollar soda, it sells... I don't know, two hundred dollar goods. Because it's a vending machine, it only accepts quarters. So Besethda has to put in those quarters, to get the goods. It takes a long time, and sometimes mistakes happen, maybe a wrong coin.

Not the best analogy though, I'm sure others can come up with better. Please do, if you wanna.

It makes me sick to see people say "better to make profit by releasing a buggy game than not to release it at all". PS3 is not a vending machine.

They arn't working for charity, I'm sure the devs would love to be working for charity, but they need food, they need to pay taxes, they need to pay for their families. It's not bad that they want a profit, and it's not exactly that they want the profit, it's more of they NEED the profit, or else they can't make another game. And that's not the whole part, what about those that didn't have any other platform, would they be happier without the game entirely?
Also, I'm aware PS3 isn't a vending machine, it was an analogy.

You need to quit with the analogies and I think you missed my point. I'll clarify.

As a consumer you should care more about getting a quality product than Bethesda's profit.

I did get a quality product, I didn't buy it on the PS3. And with foresight, I would want to support a developer that has made me favorite games, and I would want them to make future games, even though they had a small hiccup.

So your attitude is: "Fuck those people who bought the PS3 version, I got mine so I don't care as long as Bethesda makes money".