Well the Slim was a given, prejudicing from my accounts of the terrible terrible PS2S. I guess I just got lucky getting a console that somehow avoids most of the issues.Crono1973 said:
Where should I place my anger? (Bethesda/Sony)
- Thread starter Itdoesthatsometimes
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Ta-da!Lilani said:
http://www.scedev.net/index.php
OT: Bethesda should shoulder most of the blame for the ongoing issues with their games. Sure, the PS3 has a unique architecture, but after 8 years they are pretty much the last big software house not to get to grips with it.
Most other cross platform titles run just as well across the various systems, and in most cases you couldn't tell the difference between the console versions without some pretty sophisticated analysis. Some run slightly better on the Xbox 360, others run a little better on the PS3. Rarely with enough difference to the average punter. In general, it's long since stopped being an issue. Apart from with Bethesda games. But they've never exactly been known for their bulletproof reliability anyway on any platform, have they?
There is no reason they can't apply this properly in an open world game. Actually, this is what open world games rely on; removing data from the memory that is too far away from the player to matter. It's just Bethesda who didn't create a decent memory streaming system.SajuukKhar said:
As for my own input;
Bethesda would be to blame, it is their shoddy programming that locks up under certain circumstances. They should have put more thought into designing their engine for the PS3. The split memory of the PS3 is indeed a hurdle, but it isn't something that developers can't overcome or circumvent by other means.
It is indeed funny, especially considering that Bethesda themselves admitted that their previous engine was fucked on the PS3 (they claim that they changed their tech with Skyrim, but the problems persist) and developers from Obsidian went into great detail as to exactly what it is that causes the problems (the engine being unable to properly split assets between the PS3's 256 ram + 256 Vram architecture, a problem which wcould be fixable but Bethesda don't think it would be financially worth working on).imahobbit4062 said:
So... congratulations, I guess you are the proud owner of a magic PS3, made of fairy dust and wonder. Either that, or a sad little fanboy. I wouldn't know.
P.S. Oblivion worked fine indeed, that's why I mentioned 3 titles that don't, and not 4. Sadly, the Oblivion PS3 port was developed by 4J Studios, not Bethesda. I guess those guys suck less.
both;
the PS3 is so under powered for games that use ram its not funny
Bethesda for even developing on the PS3, they shouldn't have bothered, or made the PS3 version a PC/XBOX360 lite version with lots more loading screens and no action recording (like moving items on shelves)
but imagine the nerd rage if bethesda came out and said the PS3 was to shit for skyrim to actually be worth doing
the PS3 is so under powered for games that use ram its not funny
Bethesda for even developing on the PS3, they shouldn't have bothered, or made the PS3 version a PC/XBOX360 lite version with lots more loading screens and no action recording (like moving items on shelves)
but imagine the nerd rage if bethesda came out and said the PS3 was to shit for skyrim to actually be worth doing
Wouldn't be so great if the PC won the console war? And every game stalled to be compatible with dated tech. Such a dream. I love how the elite love to tout. "You should have bought it on PC." Yeah, Maybe if I wasn't saving for the PS3 I could have picked up a PC on the cheap. Playing a gifted game on a borrowed device, obviously I should have got it on the PC. Basically...FUCK YOU!
I say blame Sony for making an idiotic console architecture which has done nothing but frustrate developers since its inception. They just had to be "unique."
Honestly, it sounds when it comes to your Fallout troubles, it sounds like you might have a scratched or somehow damaged disc. I've had my games freeze on me occasionally but to consistently stop working after 35 minutes every time you start a new game, that sounds like damaged disc to me.
It works great on the 360... However, yes, PC is definitely the best route to take with any Bethesda developed game.Dimitriov said:
Well what do you expect, you're using a console. No amount of time is going to magically make it run games better, and total engine redesign so that it runs stabley on the odd system out is extremely unlikely.Itdoesthatsometimes said:
TBH you have both to blame. Sony for creating a product with inferior RAM management, which from memory is a large part of what's causing the crashes. Their console can't run games like the ones Bethesda makes because of its flaws.
At the same time, Bethesda didn't put the effort into re-designing the engine for a more multiplatform release so that the PS3 could handle it, despite the fact they were developing the game for the PS3.
Some of the blame also lies on you though for buying the game on a system its either known if you bought it post release, or rather suspected if you bought it on release, to run poorly on. On either of the other companies sides it would have taken thousands of $ in redesigning their products to be compatible, as well as a lot of extra work. Your choice was whether to get the faulty game on the faulty system, not get it, or get the game on a system it works well with.
This topic has really taken a diction all it's own, but I will say, my previous FUCK YOU post does not app;y to either you Jocaren or RedDeadFred. I do not want it to be said that I do not take criticism well. But really I think the point that Bethesda released an inferior product to PS3 consumers has been made clear. PS3 released a next generation console without next generation "compatibilities" as well. where do we go from here is the real question, and always was with my original intent with this topic.
P.S. The "FUCK YOU" post does not app;y to most people either.
P.S. The "FUCK YOU" post does not app;y to most people either.
What a ridiculous statement to make. Just because a high number of people are having issues, that is not to say that the game is not functioning for the majority of people that bought it. I have Oblivion, Fallout 3 and Skyrim on PS3, and they are all working perfectly. I had Skyrim freeze on me a couple of times, but that's it. Two of my mates have PS3 Skyrim as well, and it is running fine.Carnagath said:
Given the amount of copies of Skyrim sold on the PS3, if EVERYONE had issues with it, no way could Bethesda get away with it. As it is, more people than not are able to play the game without problems, and that's why they are continuing with releasing their games on the platform. I'm not saying it's right, cause I would be pissed as well if I were one of those whose game didn't function properly. However, this is a case of Bethesda being greedy/lazy/incompetent or whatever you want to call it, because they should be familiar with Sony's hardware by now and the challenges it presents. Yet they keep putting out the games, although they know beforehand that a substantial number of gamers will experience problems in some form or another.
Blame SOny for making a stupid developement platform. Blame Microsoft for not having a pwoerful engine and thus not demolishing PS3 advantage, blame Bethesda for choosing to make a larger and more interactive world rather than bugchecking every single possible outcome (i played fallout 3 TWO times and NEVER had a game hang on me, 232 hours (according to xfire) in the game and it crashed like 3 times total, im of course ignoring the minor non-gamebreaking bugs. though i did reach one point where final mission crashes upon completion), and blame everyone, because you need reasons to scapegoat, so you dont have to blame yourself for not playing these games on PC, especially THOSE games where modding community fixes the bugs and enchants the game beyond what any developer could.
Now, if somone gifts you a PS3 game while you dont have PS3, i think the problem lies somewhere else than the big companies.
games are funny this way. they sometimes manage to work fine for no reason. i remmeber CIV4, i instaleld it, played it for hundreds of hours, no bugs whatsoever, and everyone was screaming how bugged the game was. i though they were some loud silly people. but then i renstaleld the game. ok amnimations does not work anymore. fine, i dont need them. renstall 3rd time. game does not start at all. have to edit config to do windowed mode and only then it works. reinstall 4th time - works perfectly. reinstall 5th time - no fulslcreen mode again. funny thing is, almost nothing changed on my system, and each install i ahd different amount of buggyness.
You mean the way games are stalling to be compatible to 7 year old hardware that run on consoles now as opposed to games on PC that oppenly admit "Yeah were not supporting these old processors anymore, it was only 0.1% of our costumerbase anyway". very stale right?
Now, if somone gifts you a PS3 game while you dont have PS3, i think the problem lies somewhere else than the big companies.
You should have asked that question last summer when Dawnguard was released for Xbox and PC but not for PS3. Too late to wonder which party you should place anger towards.Itdoesthatsometimes said:
Just let it go.
I think this is a case of the classic misunderstanding regarding the ways in which the problems with Bethesda games manifest themselves on the PS3. Problems are relevant to the size of the save file that your console keeps. Problems start showing up at different filesizes for different people. With Skyrim, for example, many players started having problems when their save file exceeded 6 mb's. For others, it was larger. For me, it took a filesize of 16mb for the game to break down, and at that point the frame rate became sluggish and the game would freeze the entire console after about 30 minutes of play. Bottom line is this: It takes a long time for the game to break down. I had about 100 hours of playtime on Skyrim before the game became unplayable. Some players don't play that long. You can finish Skyrim in 10-15 hours if you don't care about the sandboxing and rush the main quest only. Therefore, many players are happy to report that their game had no issues, which is false. The game WILL break down for everyone after a certain point. DLC makes the situation worse, since more assets are loaded into the game.havoc33 said:
Regarding your situation, as I said, Oblivion was fine, because the port was not Bethesda's. Fallout 3 was also okay without any DLC. I bought it on day 1 and finished it without issues (apart from the bugs that every version has). Shortly after, I traded it in, and a year later I bought the GOTY edition, which installed all the DLC in my system. Well, the game was unplayable. Anchorage especially ran at single-digit FPS, and would freeze constantly. You say your version was fine. If you are talking about the GOTY version, where you actually finished the main game AND the DLC, while doing a lot of sandboxing and having a large save file, then there's no chance, sorry, and you are lying. Exactly the same goes for Skyrim. As for New Vegas, even the vanilla version was fucked, and the game became a slideshow after playing for about 40 hours, and would crash every couple of minutes. I don't draw all this just from personal experience either, I am a member of a pretty big community for such games in my country, and every PS3 user had problems if they had a long playtime. It started happening at different times, but it eventually did happen for everyone. Of course, if you rush through the game, you're fine,
In the case of something like a Bethesda game which are always buggy, always popular, and is being released on your opponents platform at the same time? Yeah, let's not beat around the bush here, they have no control. They may literally have control on a technical and legal level, but realistically they are not going to turn away that business.Crono1973 said:
And as for the OP, I don't even see a real question or statement being made there. Are you complaining because Bethesda games are buggy and want to know if it's Bethesda's or Sony's fault? Because I'd level the blame almost squarely at Bethesda. Their game are popular enough that bugs or not, Sony can't afford to delay them compared to other platforms. And in the end, it's Bethesda who's programmers and other tech people are so totally inept that their games never work properly when released on any platform.