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

[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.

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".

I should've added a post script to my previous post. But I am TRYING to say that a buggy product is better then no product. It's not exactly besethda's fault of the PS3's limitation, they're trying to work around it, and consequently it has bugs.

 

[Epona]

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.

Absolutely. It amazes me that people openly admit that Bethesda makes buggy games but then blame the PS3 with a straight face. Consoles have consistent hardware so there is no excuse for a bad not working properly on a console.

 

[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".

I should've added a post script to my previous post. But I am TRYING to say that a buggy product is better then no product. It's not exactly besethda's fault of the PS3's limitation, they're trying to work around it, and consequently it has bugs.

A product that becomes unplayable thanks to it's bugs is WORSE than not having it released at all. An unplayable game is wasted money.

Yes, it is Bethesda's fault that they can't make the games work properly on the PS3. That's their job, to make games that work properly. These limitations that you are talking about, it's really that the PS3 just allocates it's 512MB of RAM differently. Other professional devs can figure it out.

 

[SadisticFire]

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.

But they don't have as many interactive object to process. They maybe open world, but they don't have gun, weapon, container, chest, several different items cluttering shelves, laying corpses. All with an inventory, so they have to store it in a table, then call upon it later. It's a different a stress load on the PS3's design that Xbox and PC's don't have.

 

[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.

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".

I should've added a post script to my previous post. But I am TRYING to say that a buggy product is better then no product. It's not exactly besethda's fault of the PS3's limitation, they're trying to work around it, and consequently it has bugs.

A product that becomes unplayable thanks to it's bugs is WORSE than not having it released at all. An unplayable game is wasted money.

Yes, it is Bethesda's fault that they can't make the work properly on the PS3. That's their job, to make games that work properly. These limitations that you are talking about, it's really that the PS3 just allocates it's 512MB of RAM differently.

And that differently isn't ideal for a game like Skyrim. When you buy a game, it's a gamble if you don't put research into it, and I already admitted that yes, it sucks, I would've fallen victim for it too. But it would mean I would get a future release of a series I like, and I would know not to buy it for that platform.

 

[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".

I should've added a post script to my previous post. But I am TRYING to say that a buggy product is better then no product. It's not exactly besethda's fault of the PS3's limitation, they're trying to work around it, and consequently it has bugs.

A product that becomes unplayable thanks to it's bugs is WORSE than not having it released at all. An unplayable game is wasted money.

Yes, it is Bethesda's fault that they can't make the work properly on the PS3. That's their job, to make games that work properly. These limitations that you are talking about, it's really that the PS3 just allocates it's 512MB of RAM differently.

And that differently isn't ideal for a game like Skyrim. When you buy a game, it's a gamble if you don't put research into it, and I already admitted that yes, it sucks, I would've fallen victim for it too. But it would mean I would get a future release of a series I like, and I would know not to buy it for that platform.

Bethesda should have made Skyrim work on it or they should not have released it. Once it's out on the market people assume it was tested properly and it works. In fact, Bethesda actually said (lied) that the PS3 version worked just as well as the 360 version.

I can't believe you are blaming everyone except Bethesda.

 

[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.

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".

I should've added a post script to my previous post. But I am TRYING to say that a buggy product is better then no product. It's not exactly besethda's fault of the PS3's limitation, they're trying to work around it, and consequently it has bugs.

A product that becomes unplayable thanks to it's bugs is WORSE than not having it released at all. An unplayable game is wasted money.

Yes, it is Bethesda's fault that they can't make the work properly on the PS3. That's their job, to make games that work properly. These limitations that you are talking about, it's really that the PS3 just allocates it's 512MB of RAM differently.

And that differently isn't ideal for a game like Skyrim. When you buy a game, it's a gamble if you don't put research into it, and I already admitted that yes, it sucks, I would've fallen victim for it too. But it would mean I would get a future release of a series I like, and I would know not to buy it for that platform.

Bethesda should have made Skyrim work on it or they should not have released it. Once it's out on the market people assume it was tested properly and it works. In fact, Bethesda actually said (lied) that the PS3 version worked just as well as the 360 version.

I can't believe you are blaming everyone except Bethesda.

Then call them out on the lie and blame them partially, and blame the limitations as well.

 

[infinity_turtles]

To everyone saying there's no game that can be compared to Bethesda's? Two Worlds 2. Say what you will about quality, but it's a large open-world game very clearly inspired by the Elder Scrolls games that's not an unplayable mess on the PS3 like what Bethesda releases.

Frankly, Bethesda is pretty much scum when it comes to what they've done with the PS3. They release games that don't work, that they sure as fuck should know don't work by now, and before release always say they've fixed the problems so they can trick people into buying the PS3 version. It's a shitty business practice and they really should've been sued by now. I don't care how good your game is, shit like this shouldn't be acceptable or defended.

 

[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".

I should've added a post script to my previous post. But I am TRYING to say that a buggy product is better then no product. It's not exactly besethda's fault of the PS3's limitation, they're trying to work around it, and consequently it has bugs.

A product that becomes unplayable thanks to it's bugs is WORSE than not having it released at all. An unplayable game is wasted money.

Yes, it is Bethesda's fault that they can't make the work properly on the PS3. That's their job, to make games that work properly. These limitations that you are talking about, it's really that the PS3 just allocates it's 512MB of RAM differently.

And that differently isn't ideal for a game like Skyrim. When you buy a game, it's a gamble if you don't put research into it, and I already admitted that yes, it sucks, I would've fallen victim for it too. But it would mean I would get a future release of a series I like, and I would know not to buy it for that platform.

Bethesda should have made Skyrim work on it or they should not have released it. Once it's out on the market people assume it was tested properly and it works. In fact, Bethesda actually said (lied) that the PS3 version worked just as well as the 360 version.

I can't believe you are blaming everyone except Bethesda.

Then call them out on the lie and blame them partially, and blame the limitations as well.

No, the specs haven't changed since the PS3 launched and Bethesda KNEW what they had to work with. If Square had released Final Fantasy XIII on the Wii and it ran like shit, no one would blame the Wii.

 

[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.

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".

I should've added a post script to my previous post. But I am TRYING to say that a buggy product is better then no product. It's not exactly besethda's fault of the PS3's limitation, they're trying to work around it, and consequently it has bugs.

A product that becomes unplayable thanks to it's bugs is WORSE than not having it released at all. An unplayable game is wasted money.

Yes, it is Bethesda's fault that they can't make the work properly on the PS3. That's their job, to make games that work properly. These limitations that you are talking about, it's really that the PS3 just allocates it's 512MB of RAM differently.

And that differently isn't ideal for a game like Skyrim. When you buy a game, it's a gamble if you don't put research into it, and I already admitted that yes, it sucks, I would've fallen victim for it too. But it would mean I would get a future release of a series I like, and I would know not to buy it for that platform.

Bethesda should have made Skyrim work on it or they should not have released it. Once it's out on the market people assume it was tested properly and it works. In fact, Bethesda actually said (lied) that the PS3 version worked just as well as the 360 version.

I can't believe you are blaming everyone except Bethesda.

Then call them out on the lie and blame them partially, and blame the limitations as well.

No, the specs haven't changed since the PS3 launched and Bethesda KNEW what they had to work with. If Square had released Final Fantasy XIII on the Wii and it ran like shit, no one would blame the Wii?

I would to blame the Wii. I think you're covering a lot of people under one umbrella. Though seeing as where this debate has gone, I don't think either side will come to an agreement. So I'll just say, sure, you have fair points and I have no other fair points.

 

[Dr. Dice Lord]

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".

I should've added a post script to my previous post. But I am TRYING to say that a buggy product is better then no product. It's not exactly besethda's fault of the PS3's limitation, they're trying to work around it, and consequently it has bugs.

A product that becomes unplayable thanks to it's bugs is WORSE than not having it released at all. An unplayable game is wasted money.

Yes, it is Bethesda's fault that they can't make the games work properly on the PS3. That's their job, to make games that work properly. These limitations that you are talking about, it's really that the PS3 just allocates it's 512MB of RAM differently. Other professional devs can figure it out.

Except for the fact that the game is made on a new engine, on a now eight-year-old piece of hardware that is woefully under powered when placed alongside even the most modest PC. Yes other devs can figure this out, but they aren't Bethesda, and don't make the scale of games they do.

What I'm trying to say here is, yes, it sucks there are bugs on the PS3. But its what you should expect when you purchase a multi-platform game of that scale on a limited piece of hardware. If I had a PC from 2005 and tried to run Skyrim on it, I wouldn't blame the company for the 1-2 FPS I would be getting. The consoles are lucky the game was able to be ported in the first place; its like putting a lawn mower engine in your car and expecting to do 60. It's just no going to happen, sorry.

 

[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".

I should've added a post script to my previous post. But I am TRYING to say that a buggy product is better then no product. It's not exactly besethda's fault of the PS3's limitation, they're trying to work around it, and consequently it has bugs.

A product that becomes unplayable thanks to it's bugs is WORSE than not having it released at all. An unplayable game is wasted money.

Yes, it is Bethesda's fault that they can't make the games work properly on the PS3. That's their job, to make games that work properly. These limitations that you are talking about, it's really that the PS3 just allocates it's 512MB of RAM differently. Other professional devs can figure it out.

Except for the fact that the game is made on a new engine, on a now eight-year-old piece of hardware that is woefully under powered when placed alongside even the most modest PC. Yes other devs can figure this out, but they aren't Bethesda, and don't make the scale of games they do.

What I'm trying to say here is, yes, it sucks there are bugs on the PS3. But its what you should expect when you purchase a multi-platform game of that scale on a limited piece of hardware. If I had a PC from 2005 and tried to run Skyrim on it, I wouldn't blame the company for the 1-2 FPS I would be getting. The consoles are lucky the game was able to be ported in the first place; its like putting a lawn mower engine in your car and expecting to do 60. It's just no going to happen, sorry.

So you believe that consoles are not adequate to run Skyrim but you still don't blame Bethesda for releasing it on consoles?

BTW, your example about trying to run Skyrim on a 2005 PC shows that you don't understand the difference between consoles and PC's. In short, when you buy a PC game you need to check the specs and be sure it will run on your PC. On consoles every game with the PS3/360/Wii logo is supposed to run properly on that console. People who bought the game on PS3 had every right to expect it to run properly.

 

[Dr. Dice Lord]

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".

I should've added a post script to my previous post. But I am TRYING to say that a buggy product is better then no product. It's not exactly besethda's fault of the PS3's limitation, they're trying to work around it, and consequently it has bugs.

A product that becomes unplayable thanks to it's bugs is WORSE than not having it released at all. An unplayable game is wasted money.

Yes, it is Bethesda's fault that they can't make the games work properly on the PS3. That's their job, to make games that work properly. These limitations that you are talking about, it's really that the PS3 just allocates it's 512MB of RAM differently. Other professional devs can figure it out.

So you believe that consoles are not adequate to run Skyrim but you still don't blame Bethesda for releasing it on consoles?

BTW, your example about trying to run Skyrim on a 2005 PC shows that you don't understand the difference between consoles and PC's. In short, when you buy a PC game you need to check the specs and be sure it will run on your PC. On consoles every game with the PS3/360/Wii logo is supposed to run properly on that console. People who bought the game on PS3 had every right to expect it to run properly.

I've built myself three gaming PC's since 2000 and have a 165 game steam library, fairly sure I know about the difference between the PC and the consoles. There's a reason I don't purchase games on the consoles anymore, its because of issues like this. I'm not trying to say its not a problem, or that its not annoying because I've been there.

"On consoles every game with the PS3/360/Wii logo is supposed to run properly on that console." Run, yes, run without issues? Probably not. Run without compromise? Definitely not. At the end of the day you're purchasing a game that has been coded for three completely different machines. There are going to be problems every single time. Maybe not of this caliber, but there are and they will take time to fix; that's a reality of gaming. Especially console gaming. You're running high-fidelity games on ancient hardware, problems are assured.

"your example about trying to run Skyrim on a 2005 PC shows that you don't understand the difference between consoles and PC's. In short, when you buy a PC game you need to check the specs and be sure it will run on your PC." Before you buy a multi-platform sandbox game you should check with yourself to see if you honestly expect a bug free experience. And if you do, please re-evaluate your perspective.

 

[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".

I should've added a post script to my previous post. But I am TRYING to say that a buggy product is better then no product. It's not exactly besethda's fault of the PS3's limitation, they're trying to work around it, and consequently it has bugs.

A product that becomes unplayable thanks to it's bugs is WORSE than not having it released at all. An unplayable game is wasted money.

Yes, it is Bethesda's fault that they can't make the games work properly on the PS3. That's their job, to make games that work properly. These limitations that you are talking about, it's really that the PS3 just allocates it's 512MB of RAM differently. Other professional devs can figure it out.

So you believe that consoles are not adequate to run Skyrim but you still don't blame Bethesda for releasing it on consoles?

BTW, your example about trying to run Skyrim on a 2005 PC shows that you don't understand the difference between consoles and PC's. In short, when you buy a PC game you need to check the specs and be sure it will run on your PC. On consoles every game with the PS3/360/Wii logo is supposed to run properly on that console. People who bought the game on PS3 had every right to expect it to run properly.

I've built myself three gaming PC's since 2000 and have a 165 game steam library, fairly sure I know about the difference between the PC and the consoles. There's a reason I don't purchase games on the consoles anymore, its because of issues like this. I'm not trying to say its not a problem, or that its not annoying because I've been there.

"On consoles every game with the PS3/360/Wii logo is supposed to run properly on that console." Run, yes, run without issues? Probably not. Run without compromise? Definitely not. At the end of the day you're purchasing a game that has been coded for three completely different machines. There are going to be problems every single time. Maybe not of this caliber, but there are and they will take time to fix; that's a reality of gaming. Especially console gaming. You're running high-fidelity games on ancient hardware, problems are assured.

"your example about trying to run Skyrim on a 2005 PC shows that you don't understand the difference between consoles and PC's. In short, when you buy a PC game you need to check the specs and be sure it will run on your PC." Before you buy a multi-platform sandbox game you should check with yourself to see if you honestly expect a bug free experience. And if you do, please re-evaluate your perspective.

I don't expect any game to be perfect, especially from Bethesda but the PS3 version of Skyrim was unplayable and that is unacceptable. Bethesda is to blame for releasing it that way and I don't believe it should have gotten through Sony's approval process. Blaming the consumer is the last thing I would do. Blaming a console for a developers failure to make a game run properly (not perfectly) is ridiculous as well.

Now you say the hardware is old and that you don't think it's capable of running Skyrim, why don't you fault Bethesda for releasing it then?

 

[DeadlyYellow]

The only presumption I draw from all these rants and complaints is that the PS3 was one of the consoles to get steadily worse as it aged.

I own a first-gen and never seem to encounter any of these rage-inducing bugs. Where are all my crashes and memory faults? I can't claim to be a true gamer if I am satisfied with my console.

 

[Epona]

The only presumption I draw from all these rants and complaints is that the PS3 was one of the consoles to get steadily worse as it aged.

I own a first-gen and never seem to encounter any of these rage-inducing bugs. Where are all my crashes and memory faults? I can't claim to be a true gamer if I am satisfied with my console.

Pretty sure it was established that both the phat and the slim had the same problems with Skyrim.

 

[Mid Boss]

Both hold some blame. Sony for how the system is designed. But Bethesda should shoulder most of the blame. With all the player testing Skyrim at least should have gone through there's NO WAY they couldn't have known about the issue. Yet they shoved it out anyway and told their customers they'll get around to fixing it eventually.

I mean, who cares if they pissed off a lot of customers. They got their money! That's all that matters.

 

[Carnagath]

Don't buy Bethesda games for PS3. Seriously. Stop. They've put out products that are not fit for purpose 3 times now (Fo3, NV, Skyrim). They are released in a terrible state, and gradually become completely unplayable as they DARE to release DLC for them as well, which loads up their trainwreck of an engine with more modules and kills the performance even faster. Bethesda are straight up SCAMMING you on the PS3. Their games don't work, they know it, they can't fix them, and they continue releasing them. Don't reward them for this practice. Also, blacklist all reviewers who give a high score to their games on the PS3 platform.

 

[nvzboy]

It is indeed quite horrific how these games run. Bethesda has a reputation of making fairly unstable games but the fact that the console versions don't have the in-game debugging tool makes it even worse. After I heard the problems owners of the console version were having I decided to stick with the PC versions of Bethesda games so if a problem arises I at least have a chance of fixing it myself. Sony's PS3 is known for having more difficult coding to work with than PC or Xbox360 so that only adds to the problems. I say the problem is with both but more so with Bethesda.