Digital Foundry VS Bethesda: PS3 Skyrim is still shit

EviLore said:
Really? Not supporting the PS3 is better than letting people waste their money on a quarter-assed port that is apparently unplayable, and that level of support should not be applauded.
Click to expand...
but still, i can't help but feel that TheSeks would agree with me.

thanks for bringing back post history.
 
EternalGamer said:
So even if the issue was a just a matter of having to reboot your system you would see it as "completely unacceptable"?

Comparing getting sick and vomiting with getting a crappy framerate and rebooting a console is a little absurd, don't you think?
Click to expand...

yes, still unacceptable. You paid for the game, it should work normally without you as the customer having to resort to random self fixes
 
EternalGamer said:
If what they were buying was misrepresented, then they can and should. But if it is just a matter of it not running as good as the other versions after certain amounts of time for a certain percentage of players in certain scenarios, then I am really not sure they should.
Click to expand...

I would considered a game running at 4-5 frames per second unplayable. It doesn't matter if it's 60 hours in or 5 mins. You are not being charge per hour when you buy a game. If I want to continue playing the game for the next two year I should be able to do so.

What I don't understand is that it's not OK for customers to demand certain level of quality and when we do it's because we are greedy entitlement assholes yet company complain about used game sale, maintaining server, people not buying game day one etc and that it's OK for these company to have the sense of entitlement.
 
GarthVaderUK said:
Is there no certification process for PS3 retail games?
Click to expand...

Of course. The problem is that Sony cert handles a large volume of titles and most likely does not test 1 instance of the game (Disc A on PS3 A performed by Tester A) for the amount of hours required to see this issue. My guess is that they have specialized people for certain tasks and break it up that way. If people make themselves heard about this to a point where Sony takes it seriously, I bet it will be added to their process.

Anyway for those of you encountering this, hound Bethesda, hound Sony. Be heard, get your money back, and make sure this bullshit doesn't continue. Do not let this slide.
 
wow @ EternalGamer. Even with the video, you are still criticizing the players, stating how their rational complaints are a sign of being spoiled brats.
 
EternalGamer .... please ... stop.

this is a game that has well documented technical problems, they are very common, even if they can present themselves to different degree of severity..... then why the hell people who PAID for this crap shouldn't be complaining or pretending a solution ?????

It is just common sense.
 
That is just insane. Have no idea why anyone (here, anyway) would even think about getting the PS3 version anymore. Glad I'm on PC, where it's an excellent game, and certainly in contention for my GOTY.

Can this even get fixed? We've been hearing about this problem since FO3.
 
EternalGamer said:
If what they were buying was misrepresented, then they can and should. But if it is just a matter of it not running as good as the other versions after certain amounts of time for a certain percentage of players in certain scenarios, then I am really not sure they should.
Click to expand...

Fuck that.

Seriously.

This isn't something that can be downplayed by saying it's only occurring for a certain percentage, in certain scenarios, in certain amounts of time.

I have not heard of a single PS3 user who has been able to successfully complete this game without running into this problem. I would be gladly be corrected if you could point them to me, but I just have not seen it at all.

Additionally, it's not a matter of the game running simply worse. It's a matter of the game hiccuping to the point that it is unplayable. You cannot participate in combat, cast spells, travel or go anywhere with any reliability at all.

If you viewed the videos in this and thought that was bad, it gets even worse in combat.

It's not hyperbole to say that the game is broken.

It absolutely is.

The patch is a band aid that is trying to close up a 9 inch gash across your chest that is oozing out all sorts of nasty innards. Yes, it may hold for a moment, but all that stuff is going to spill out eventually and then you are back to where you started.

Blah.
 
Never buy a Bethesda game until at least 6 months out. Hell wait for the GOTY edition if you can. Only frustration can come from playing the bug filled mess they always end up being. This applies to all platforms.
 
Sony are equally to blame. Doesn't every game get tested and given the OK by them? They knew it was a piece of shit but couldn't delay it and let Xbox have it all to themselves. I think people have a better shot bitching at Sony to get something done about this than to Bethesda who seem to be a bunch of incompetent money hungry fuckheads.
 
Nasty, nasty bug. Outside of ones that affect saved games, it's hard to conceive of a bug more unfortunate than one that basically punishes you the more you enjoy the game. And saved games can at least be backed up.

I think the majority of bugs/glitches in Beth games and the like that people bring up are both easily forgivable and understandable - and many people are just unrealistic about their expectations in that area - but this stuff is fairly devastating.
 
EternalGamer said:
Are we to assume he is lying? We must if we hold that the game is 100% broken.
Click to expand...

I have to reason to lie ;) if my game was broken I'd be complaining about it too along with everyone else but not everyone seems to be affected for whatever reason that's why I was wondering if the type of system the game is being played on makes a difference somehow or maybe the amount of saves make a difference.

I just checked and I'm at 53 saves and 91hr 20mins, don't get me wrong the game isn't running as smoothly as it did when I first started but it's not even close to that 65hr video.
 
holy shit. 0 fps??
I mean, come on. how can you release a game THIS broken? Did anyone at all test/played the PS3 version before release?
I would want my money back. It's like buying a car which stops every 200meters for no reason.
 
This happens as long as you played 65 hours or more? It doesn't matter how far along in the game you are?

I'm 30 hours in but yet to even finish a main quest line.

Recently got the "dragon-flying-backwards" glitch...is this a sign that the game will start to become unplayable?
 
antiquegamer said:
I would considered a game running at 4-5 frames per second unplayable. It doesn't matter if it's 60 hours in or 5 mins. You are not being charge per hour when you buy a game. If I want to continue playing the game for the next two year I should be able to do so.

What I don't understand is that it's not OK for customers to demand certain level of quality and when we do it's because we are greedy entitlement assholes yet company complain about used game sale, maintaining server, people not buying game day one etc and that it's OK for these company to have the sense of entitlement.
Click to expand...

I generally agree with you on the issue of consumer demand and companies having to answer to it. I guess where we differ is primarily that I think the onus is on the game writers and consumers to become informed about the badly designed product.

As I said, I think there are some people that, if they had this information ahead of time, this product would still be "ok" for. But then again I can also realize that this is because I have a different standard for what I consider "unplayable." I played a ton of games in the 32 bit era for example that had framerates below 20fps on ona regular basis. Hell, many of them that was the maximum framerate. I'm the guy that didn't really have a problem playing Enslaved while there was a ton of general bitching and moaning about it. I literally almost didn't recognize it because 20-25 fps doesn't bother me that much. I certainly don't consider it "unplayable."

In this case, it is certainly worse that than, but it's primarily in towns and primarily after fast traveling and even then only for some players, correct? I think it is a bit of hyperbole to call that "unplayable." For the consumer that has only a PS3, in fact, I think that might be a worthwhile trade off as long as they weren't decieved about it ahead of time.

Again, if they were, that is a problem.
 
gdt5016 said:
That is just insane. Have no idea why anyone (here, anyway) would even think about getting the PS3 version anymore. Glad I'm on PC, where it's an excellent game, and certainly in contention for my GOTY.

Can this even get fixed? We've been hearing about this problem since FO3.
Click to expand...

was going to get a ps3 just to play this (my 360 is thousands of miles away, and I don't want to deal with region locking) and all this has put that on hold

hear that sony? bethesda is costing you sales, time to react
 
I bought the PS3 version expecting a bit of this, but... I had no idea it would end up being that bad. Someone mentioned refunds and I think that's completely acceptable. Because releasing a product like this that people are paying $60 for is anything but. Having a worse framerate is one thing, and that was a pretty common and fair warning to anyone buying the PS3 version, but again, I had no idea it was going to be this bad.
 
Man, EVERYTHING has a defense force on GAF.

And yeah, I'd like a script that autofilters posts with the word "entitled".
 
EternalGamer said:
In this case, it is certainly worse that than, but it's primarily in towns and primarily after fast traveling and even then only for some players, correct? I think it is a bit of hyperbole to call that "unplayable." For the consumer that has only a PS3, in fact, I think that might be a worthwhile trade off as long as they weren't decieved about it ahead of time.

Again, if they were, that is a problem.
Click to expand...


Nope. It happens everywhere. Everytime. Regardless of what you do. Towns and fast traveling instigates it faster, but regardless, it will happen.

And as for your second point, Bethesda never mentioned this before hand. No reviews mentioned this prior to release. No previews mentioned. All we got from Bethesda was that they felt that they achieved a good sense of parity between all versions.

That was it.
 
EternalGamer said:
See, our definitions of 'unplayable" are even different. I can guarantee you many of those Saturn games ran at 8fps at times. I absolutely watched those videos. I agree that it looked bad. I'm glad I'm playing it on PC. But to me "unplayable" means just that: the game literally won't play or crash everytime I try to play it. It does not mean "60 hours in the framerate is sometimes shitty when I do certain things like fast travel a lot then go into towns."
Click to expand...

I have actually played games at 8FPS before and still had fun. Simcity 4 for example. Warcraft 3. WoW.

Some games were not fun at low framerates. UT99. Myth 2. GTA4. Any racing game.

You said you played SOTN at single digit FPS, how would you like to play Castlevania 1 like that? Super Mario Brothers might be possible to beat at 8FPS, Super Meat Boy not so much.

The main problem with low framerates in Skyrim is that your rate of movement goes down dramatically. The game at its heart is a walking simulator, you do not want to move any slower than you have to. The second problem is that you can't aim, even in melee. Well that's basically the entire game right there, walking and aiming attacks, game is fucking useless once those are compromised.
 
ghst said:
So, PS3 gamers are a bunch of spoiled children, who knew!?

Don't get me wrong, bitch about online passes and stuff. But don't bitch about getting "360 ports" because they don't match your magical expectation levels. The market has shifted: PS3 is a minority focus, just be glad you're getting some of the titles that the 360 gets and buy them. It seems like some people on PS3 simply don't do that because "LOL XBOX PORT!" :/

People throwing their arms up and whining and going "why aren't they supporting us!?" when they attempt to (even if poorly) is crazy.
Click to expand...

lol. are you fucking kidding? minority focus? the install base is practically dead even. i guess we are supposed to be thankful for this shit sandwich based on your viewpoint. make a functional game bethesda, or don't bother. nobody is crying about a texture or a framedrop.. the game doesn't work the longer you play it. and we're crying? fuck off with that.
 
RyanDG said:
And as for your second point, Bethesda never mentioned this before hand. No reviews mentioned this prior to release. No previews mentioned. All we got from Bethesda was that they felt that they achieved a good sense of parity between all versions.

That was it.
Click to expand...

Right, and that's a huge problem.
 
Yeah, that video looks pretty bad.

However, I'll still gladly give Bethesda my money for developing a massive hardcore single-player-only RPG in an age when the video game industry is all about mobile/Facebook games, online passes, cut content masquerading as DLC and overblown military shooters with insultingly short campaigns and twitchy multiplayer bullshit.

Then again maybe I'll feel differently when I actually get around to playing 65 hours and start seeing these issues in my own save.
 
Paznos said:
I have to reason to lie ;) if my game was broken I'd be complaining about it too along with everyone else but not everyone seems to be affected for whatever reason that's why I was wondering if the type of system the game is being played on makes a difference somehow or maybe the amount of saves make a difference.

I just checked and I'm at 53 saves and 91hr 20mins, don't get me wrong the game isn't running as smoothly as it did when I first started but it's not even close to that 65hr video.
Click to expand...

As I mentioned earlier in the thread I'm at 70+ hours, 9.3 meg save on a PS3 slim and have had one situation where the framerate went in the shitter for a few minutes (though no where near as bad as the eurogamer video). At that time I didn't even restart, I just zoned into the dungeon I was going to and the issue was gone. Worth mentioning, that when I play I tend to warp everywhere, especially this late in the game.

There's either a QA issue at Bethesda, or the PS3 version was rushed to the shelves.
 
My game fucked up for me with-in 3 hours

The first quest out into the new world borked

I click on the dude he says his line and just looks at you ; ;

3.5 hours wasted =/, had leveled up to 5 and was getting a groove

Oh wells, will start game when it's at least playable, in the backlog you go!
 
iamaustrian said:
I would want my money back. It's like buying a car which stops every 200meters for no reason.
Click to expand...

Pfff... In my day we walked everywhere for miles and miles. Can you sit on the car? Do the doors till open and close? Yes, then quit yer complaining, you entitled brat. /EternalGamer
 
EternalGamer said:
I generally agree with you on the issue of consumer demand and companies having to answer to it. I guess where we differ is primarily that I think the onus is on the game writers and consumers to become informed about the badly designed product.

As I said, I think there are some people that, if they had this information ahead of time, this product would still be "ok" for. But then again I can also realize that this is because I have a different standard for what I consider "unplayable." I played a ton of games in the 32 bit era for example that had framerates below 20fps on ona regular basis. Hell, many of them that was the maximum framerate. I'm the guy that didn't really have a problem playing Enslaved while there was a ton of general bitching and moaning about it. I literally almost didn't recognize it because 20-25 fps doesn't bother me that much. I certainly don't consider it "unplayable."

In this case, it is certainly worse that than, but it's primarily in towns and primarily after fast traveling and even then only for some players, correct? I think it is a bit of hyperbole to call that "unplayable." For the consumer that has only a PS3, in fact, I think that might be a worthwhile trade off as long as they weren't decieved about it ahead of time.

Again, if they were, that is a problem.
Click to expand...

what the hell has the bolded to do with anything??? Skyrim on PS3 would be amazing if it ran 20-25fps, but it doesn't, for many it's often in the single digits or even 0fps.

you can't equate the atrocious quality of Skyrim on PS3 to other perfectly playable ports. it makes uhmm, no sense.
 
Holy shit, that video is painful to watch. Beth should've just scrapped the PS3 version if they thought this was acceptable to ship it with, or at the very least delayed it. PC versions get delayed all the time, they could've done this with the PS3 version.
 
EternalGamer said:
I generally agree with you on the issue of consumer demand and companies having to answer to it. I guess where we differ is primarily that I think the onus is on the game writers and consumers to become informed about the badly designed product.

As I said, I think there are some people that, if they had this information ahead of time, this product would still be "ok" for. But then again I can also realize that this is because I have a different standard for what I consider "unplayable." I played a ton of games in the 32 bit era for example that had framerates below 20fps on ona regular basis. Hell, many of them that was the maximum framerate. I'm the guy that didn't really have a problem playing Enslaved while there was a ton of general bitching and moaning about it. I literally almost didn't recognize it because 20-25 fps doesn't bother me that much. I certainly don't consider it "unplayable."

In this case, it is certainly worse that than, but it's primarily in towns and primarily after fast traveling and even then only for some players, correct? I think it is a bit of hyperbole to call that "unplayable." For the consumer that has only a PS3, in fact, I think that might be a worthwhile trade off as long as they weren't decieved about it ahead of time.

Again, if they were, that is a problem.
Click to expand...
Well you're basing your opinion on the "old days of gaming", but it's pointless.
Compare it to any other product.
If i had a (newly bought) car that after 1000km would start going to 20kph tops, i would go back to the damn car dealer.
If i had a toaster that after 2 days would stop toasting, i would bring it back to the store.

Since we're talking about a good chunk of the copies, not just one or a few, people have all the rights to call Bethesda out for the shit they release.
Did they wanted half the price for half the game? No.
Did they informed everyone about the problem beforehand? No, they wanted everyone to go out and buy the game anyway.
So yeah, every right to blame them.
 
The studio has now made an official statement about these issues and promised that a new update is coming to fix what patch 1.2 already broke.

“This week we released update 1.2 across all platforms, and we’ll be releasing an incremental update next week. We anticipate it will be up on PC first, and then hit PS3 and Xbox 360 later in the week. Among other things, the update will fix issues like magic resistance not calculating properly and the rare, amazing backwards flying dragon. Once the update is released, we’ll share the full release notes,” Bethesda said on its blog.

The studio also confirmed that a steady stream of updates will be coming to Skyrim, with more patches arriving on the PC via Steam, while bulkier title updates will be posted for consoles like the PS3 or Xbox 360.

“After the holidays, we’ll continue to release regular updates for the game — through full title updates, as well as incremental “gameplay updates” to fix whatever issues come up along with rebalancing portions of the game for difficulty or exploits. We plan on having a lot of these, not just a few. Overall, you should expect updates to be hitting the PC and Steam earlier and more often, as that’s a process we control. Console updates will follow, as they must be certified and processed by those manufacturers.”

Last but not least, the studio highlights that it’s still a huge game but it’s going to take more care with its updates, trying to fix underlying issues instead of minor problems that could cause serious, overarching glitches.

“We’ve also realized that with the millions upon millions of people playing Skyrim, we need to treat our updates with greater care. If we get too aggressive trying to fix a minor issue, we run a risk of breaking something larger in a game like this. To be safe, we are prioritizing code side fixes right now over data fixes. Quest and balance issues are usually data, and those will start rolling in a large way with the January updates.”
Click to expand...

http://news.softpedia.com/news/New-...k-Bethesda-Promises-More-Updates-238047.shtml
 
mavs said:
I have actually played games at 8FPS before and still had fun. Simcity 4 for example. Warcraft 3. WoW.

Some games were not fun at low framerates. UT99. Myth 2. GTA4. Any racing game.

You said you played SOTN at single digit FPS, how would you like to play Castlevania 1 like that? Super Mario Brothers might be possible to beat at 8FPS, Super Meat Boy not so much.

The main problem with low framerates in Skyrim is that your rate of movement goes down dramatically. The game at its heart is a walking simulator, you do not want to move any slower than you have to. The second problem is that you can't aim, even in melee. Well that's basically the entire game right there, walking and aiming attacks, game is fucking useless once those are compromised.
Click to expand...

A very good point.

Still, I think the onus is more on the game writers and consumers.
 
PS3 version was never previewed or sent to press for review. Now we know why. This only illustrates that they knew ahead of time the PS3 problem has problems.
 
I'm about 5 hours in on the PS3 version and watching those videos is really putting a damper on my enthusiasm to keep playing. Guess I'll leave it for now...

@Respawn: That doesn't say anything about improving the PS3 framerate, at least, not for the patch next week.
 
The most surprising aspect of this whole fiasco is that even with Bethesda's track record, people are still surprised by this. How the fuck did anyone not see this coming? Also surprising is that the universal praise in reviews has almost universally completely overlooked this. What incentive does the company have to improve its products when it just gets 10s across the board?

Game is a shit sandwich right now, and should have review scores that reflect that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

[Digital Foundry] Mario Kart World - Nintendo Switch 2 - Digital Foundry Tech Review
News Analysis Review  2 3 4
160
769
Musashipan replied
ID tech8 deep dive. Digital foundry
2
84
795
The_Observer replied
FAST Fusion - Switch 2 - Digital Foundry Analysis
2
66
276
DeafTourette replied
Digital Foundry: Switch 2 LIVEstream with special guest
42
236
ReBurn replied
Switch 2 cpu bottleneck issues: Digital foundry
2 3 4
166
10K
Mozza replied
Top Bottom