Support NeoGAF

[El-Suave]

I just checked and I can send my PS3 UK import (since Zenimax doesn't include English voiceovers on non UK editions of their games anymore in Europe, thanks for that as well btw.) back to Amazon till the end of January.
The returns form even has "Performance or quality not adequate" as a reason of why you're sending it back. I hope Amazon get their money back from Zenimax for this copy.

I could buy it on 360 but I still have one of the awfully loud ones and without an install I don't want to play it on there. I planned to play the game after I've finished Batman and Rayman but now I'm waiting for a price cut on the 360 version or more than anecdotal news of the PS3 version actually becoming better through another patch.

 

[TimeEffect]

Isn't any of the fault on Sony for the limited RAM?

 

[SolidSnakex]

I'm glad this is getting the (negative) attention it deserves. I said in a previous thread that there is zero chance they didn't know about these issues, and that selling the game anyways should be a crime.

The fact that they have not, at any point, come even close to mustering up an apology is ridiculous. Greedy fucking bastards will never see another dime of my money (and I didn't even buy the game on PS3).

The problem is that the negative attention is mostly restricted to message boards. Major gaming sites aren't giving it much attention. Just watch the latest Bonus Round. There are 3 people on the panel and the problems with the PS3 version aren't brought up even when they're asked what could hold it back from winning awards. Shane even claims that Skyrim is the least buggy game that Bethesda has ever released.

 

[freenudemacusers]

Isn't any of the fault on Sony for the limited RAM?

I can't think of another game that hits 0 FPS. So.... no.

 

[MrPliskin]

Isn't any of the fault on Sony for the limited RAM?

No? I don't blame Budweiser if a bar serves the beer warm. It's 100% on the shoulders of bethesda to make a ge that runs on a platform they are developing for. What kind of ass backwards thought process puts the blame on Sony?

 

[TimeEffect]

No? I don't blame Budweiser if a bar serves the beer warm. It's 100% on the shoulders of bethesda to make a ge that runs on a platform they are developing for. What kind of ass backwards thought process puts the blame on Sony?

It was what the New Vegas dev was saying.

 

[Zinga]

I for one don't blame Bethesda for this. It's Sony's fault for designing such a developer unfriendly architecture, and for limiting the amount of RAM available to devs in the PS3 to 256mb.

We should be angry at Sony for shortchanging consumers once again because they wanted to advance their own corporate interests ala CELL and Blu-Ray over what was good for the gaming industry.

So you ask, what's my evidence? the Xbox 360 runs this game much, much better because it is a much better and developer friendly architecture, even if the PS3 is potentially more powerful. Sony should make their next PlayStation more like the Xbox 360 and less like the PS3.

If you want to run games like Skyrim, you need to either have a PC or a decently engineered console.

 

[freenudemacusers]

I for one don't blame Bethesda for this. It's Sony's fault for designing such a developer unfriendly architecture, and for limiting the amount of RAM available to devs in the PS3 to 256mb.

We should be angry at Sony for shortchanging consumers once again because they wanted to advance their own corporate interests ala CELL and Blu-Ray over what was good for the gaming industry.

So you ask, what's my evidence? the Xbox 360 runs this game much, much better because it is a much better and developer friendly architecture, even if the PS3 is potentially more powerful. Sony should make their next PlayStation more like the Xbox 360 and less like the PS3.

If you want to run games like Skyrim, you need to either have a PC or a decently engineered console.

lol

 

[GavinGT]

Isn't any of the fault on Sony for the limited RAM?

It was what the New Vegas dev was saying.

Fuck dude, at least read the last page before moving the discussion in circles.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I for one don't blame Bethesda for this. It's Sony's fault for designing such a developer unfriendly architecture, and for limiting the amount of RAM available to devs in the PS3 to 256mb.

We should be angry at Sony for shortchanging consumers once again because they wanted to advance their own corporate interests ala CELL and Blu-Ray over what was good for the gaming industry.

So you ask, what's my evidence? the Xbox 360 runs this game much, much better because it is a much better and developer friendly architecture, even if the PS3 is potentially more powerful. Sony should make their next PlayStation more like the Xbox 360 and less like the PS3.

If you want to run games like Skyrim, you need to either have a PC or a decently engineered console.

Is this a meme post like ghst or are you being serious?

 

[TimeEffect]

Fuck dude, at least read the last page before moving the discussion in circles.

Forgive me

 

[Varna]

lol

If they couldn't get it to run decently it shouldn't have been released. End of story. 100% their fault.

 

[McLovin]

I for one don't blame Bethesda for this. It's Sony's fault for designing such a developer unfriendly architecture, and for limiting the amount of RAM available to devs in the PS3 to 256mb.

We should be angry at Sony for shortchanging consumers once again because they wanted to advance their own corporate interests ala CELL and Blu-Ray over what was good for the gaming industry.

So you ask, what's my evidence? the Xbox 360 runs this game much, much better because it is a much better and developer friendly architecture, even if the PS3 is potentially more powerful. Sony should make their next PlayStation more like the Xbox 360 and less like the PS3.

If you want to run games like Skyrim, you need to either have a PC or a decently engineered console.

Almost every other multi platform game runs about the same. And it's the same amount of ram on both consoles. The ps3 has it split though also the os uses more then the xboxs.
Edit-my bad I didn't notice the sarcasm. It would be pretty funny if a gaffer of all people actually thought this.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

Isn't any of the fault on Sony for the limited RAM?

There isn't really a simple answer to this question to be honest. It's not like, years ago, Sony engineers had any idea of the issues their decisions would create for 3rd-party multiplatform developers. For one thing, I think that they were probably thinking that people would be porting to the 360, not the other way around, so decisions like the split memory-pool wouldn't be huge problems for devs as their engines would be built around it.

On the other hand, it's apparently quite a tough system to get the most out of, though well worth the effort if you can make it sing. I guess I don't think "fault" is the right word basically, you make these calls with the information and managerial directives (i.e. BluRay) you have at the time, and sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.

 

[Averon]

I for one don't blame Bethesda for this. It's Sony's fault for designing such a developer unfriendly architecture, and for limiting the amount of RAM available to devs in the PS3 to 256mb.

We should be angry at Sony for shortchanging consumers once again because they wanted to advance their own corporate interests ala CELL and Blu-Ray over what was good for the gaming industry.

So you ask, what's my evidence? the Xbox 360 runs this game much, much better because it is a much better and developer friendly architecture, even if the PS3 is potentially more powerful. Sony should make their next PlayStation more like the Xbox 360 and less like the PS3.

If you want to run games like Skyrim, you need to either have a PC or a decently engineered console.

NotSureIfSerious.jpg

 

[ZephyrFate]

I for one don't blame Bethesda for this. It's Sony's fault for designing such a developer unfriendly architecture, and for limiting the amount of RAM available to devs in the PS3 to 256mb.

We should be angry at Sony for shortchanging consumers once again because they wanted to advance their own corporate interests ala CELL and Blu-Ray over what was good for the gaming industry.

So you ask, what's my evidence? the Xbox 360 runs this game much, much better because it is a much better and developer friendly architecture, even if the PS3 is potentially more powerful. Sony should make their next PlayStation more like the Xbox 360 and less like the PS3.

If you want to run games like Skyrim, you need to either have a PC or a decently engineered console.

Meme posts are funny.

 

[AngelSoldier]

O_O Woke up and read through two more pages of

"Lolololol Master RACEEEEEEE"

and

"Should've bought the Xbox version"

Shut the fuck up already. ._.

Jeez. Neither response is meaningful or helpful.

 

[BeeDog]

I for one don't blame Bethesda for this. It's Sony's fault for designing such a developer unfriendly architecture, and for limiting the amount of RAM available to devs in the PS3 to 256mb.

We should be angry at Sony for shortchanging consumers once again because they wanted to advance their own corporate interests ala CELL and Blu-Ray over what was good for the gaming industry.

So you ask, what's my evidence? the Xbox 360 runs this game much, much better because it is a much better and developer friendly architecture, even if the PS3 is potentially more powerful. Sony should make their next PlayStation more like the Xbox 360 and less like the PS3.

If you want to run games like Skyrim, you need to either have a PC or a decently engineered console.

Are you fucking serious? Of course it's on Bethesda to fix this, regardless of how (un)friendly the PS3 is. If the platform doesn't fit their needs or ambitions, then don't release a game they know is broken on said platform.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

O_O Woke up and read through two more pages of

"Lolololol Master RACEEEEEEE"

and

"Should've bought the Xbox version"

Shut the fuck up already. ._.

Jeez. Neither response is meaningful or helpful.

What?

 

[Uno Venova]

What?

How could you not understand that.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

How could you not understand that.

I understand it, I just don't see which posts he means is all. The last couple of pages have had some pretty interesting discussions, maybe I'm just skimming over the garbage.

 

[braves01]

sony didn't make the game. bethesda did. you don't blame apple when belkin makes a shitty ipod dock. the ps3 is not a broken platform.

Even if you don't think Sony's QA/hardware is responsible for Skyrim, I would at least expect them to get in touch with Bethesda to see what's wrong or post something on the PS blog to let people know they know it's a problem. Skyrim's gonna be GOTY on a lot of sites, the last thing I'd want IGN, Gamespot, etc. to say if worked for Sony PR is "GOTY, but not for PS3."

 

[BeeDog]

Even if you don't think Sony's QA/hardware is responsible for Skyrim, I would at least expect them to get in touch with Bethesda to see what's wrong or post something on the PS blog to let people know they know it's a problem. Skyrim's gonna be GOTY on a lot of sites, the last thing I'd want IGN, Gamespot, etc. to say if worked for Sony PR is "GOTY, but not for PS3."

Then your expectations are wrong. Skyrim isn't a small, unknown game, even on PS3, so for Sony to majorly piss off Bethesda (a pretty damn big publisher) by openly acknowledging the problem is suicidal. It also just highlights the PS3 as a problematic platform to develop for.

Of course they won't do anything about this, especially since it's doubtful Bethesda will solve this problem that has been passed on between each Gamebryo-driven game release.

 

[freenudemacusers]

Even if you don't think Sony's QA/hardware is responsible for Skyrim, I would at least expect them to get in touch with Bethesda to see what's wrong or post something on the PS blog to let people know they know it's a problem. Skyrim's gonna be GOTY on a lot of sites, the last thing I'd want IGN, Gamespot, etc. to say if worked for Sony PR is "GOTY, but not for PS3."

Don't worry, considering how little attention this has gotten in the press, I am sure nobody will say anything.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Don't worry, considering how little attention this has gotten in the press, I am sure nobody will say anything.

And this is one of the saddest parts of the situation. On some level I guess it's expected that Bethesda is quiet (especially after the Obsidian comments), but why are journalists so quiet about it?

 

[Evolved1]

The gaming press covering this, after giving it rave reviews, would make themselves look pretty bad (foolish and/or incompetent)... the majority of these outlets lack the integrity to admit their own mistakes.

This is why the industry is such a fucking joke.

 

[Truespeed]

I'm glad this is getting the (negative) attention it deserves. I said in a previous thread that there is zero chance they didn't know about these issues, and that selling the game anyways should be a crime.

The fact that they have not, at any point, come even close to mustering up an apology is ridiculous. Greedy fucking bastards will never see another dime of my money (and I didn't even buy the game on PS3).

If a lawsuit ever developed and Bethesda was asked to disclose their emails, bug tracking database, etc I bet it would show that they knew about this defect long before the game shipped for the PS3. They probably didn't realize the severity of it and just tagged it as a minor non show stopper bug that wouldn't affect the release date and would likely get fixed with a day one patch. But, there's no question in my mind that QA reported the problem because it's hard to comprehend how a competent QA department could miss something like this. Now, all we need is a former disgruntled Bethesda QA person to back me up on this.

 

[Truespeed]

Isn't any of the fault on Sony for the limited RAM?

It's not the size of your RAM but how you use it.

 

[braves01]

Then your expectations are wrong. Skyrim isn't a small, unknown game, even on PS3, so for Sony to majorly piss off Bethesda (a pretty damn big publisher) by openly acknowledging the problem is suicidal. It also just highlights the PS3 as a problematic platform to develop for.

Of course they won't do anything about this, especially since it's doubtful Bethesda will solve this problem that has been passed on between each Gamebryo-driven game release.

You're right, but it's just a shame no one--dev, Sony, journalists--has the will to be ethical for once and be honest about the problem. GOTY title not working for millions of people with no fix (or refund) in sight should be front page on any site dedicated to covering video games.

 

[perineumlick]

If a lawsuit ever developed and Bethesda was asked to disclose their emails, bug tracking database, etc I bet it would show that they knew about this defect long before the game shipped for the PS3. They probably didn't realize the severity of it and just tagged it as a minor non show stopper bug that wouldn't affect the release date and would likely get fixed with a day one patch. But, there's no question in my mind that QA reported the problem because it's hard to comprehend how a competent QA department could miss something like this. Now, all we need is a former disgruntled Bethesda QA person to back me up on this.

What makes it even more sickening is that Oblivion for PS3 didn't have this problem, at least not in my 100 hours of time with it. So these problems could have been avoided if the proper time and resources would have been applied. They just wanted to cash in up front, release some placebo patch that won't really fix the problem, and fly under the radar.

 

[Demon Ice]

Isn't any of the fault on Sony for the limited RAM?

How many other games perform like this? None. How is this is any way Sony's fault?

O_O Woke up and read through two more pages of

"Lolololol Master RACEEEEEEE"

Oh trust me, I play the game on PC and it is *far* from perfect. Tons of crashes, have had to redownload bits of the game from Steam *eight* times, so on and so forth. That patch broke more things than it fixed for us too.

Bethesda really just rushed the game out to market.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

It's not the size of your RAM but how you use it.

This is true, Crytek just love to RAM-slap people.

 

[astroturfing]

I for one don't blame Bethesda for this. It's Sony's fault for designing such a developer unfriendly architecture, and for limiting the amount of RAM available to devs in the PS3 to 256mb.

We should be angry at Sony for shortchanging consumers once again because they wanted to advance their own corporate interests ala CELL and Blu-Ray over what was good for the gaming industry.

So you ask, what's my evidence? the Xbox 360 runs this game much, much better because it is a much better and developer friendly architecture, even if the PS3 is potentially more powerful. Sony should make their next PlayStation more like the Xbox 360 and less like the PS3.

If you want to run games like Skyrim, you need to either have a PC or a decently engineered console.

if you think really hard, can you remember what crucial info you left out from your post when you tried to figure this out?

think a bit more. did you get it now....? how about now? no? ok well you conveniently forgot this: Bethesda lied about the quality of the game, they claimed it was on par with the Xbox 360 version.

 

[rohlfinator]

And this is one of the saddest parts of the situation. On some level I guess it's expected that Bethesda is quiet (especially after the Obsidian comments), but why are journalists so quiet about it?

I thought the running explanation was that they all were only given the 360 version for review. On one hand it's disappointing that there hasn't been more coverage of this, but on the other hand I don't really expect every reviewer to put 60+ hours into each version of the game, especially during the holiday season. Hopefully we start seeing some more coverage now that the issue is better known.

What makes it even more sickening is that Oblivion for PS3 didn't have this problem, at least not in my 100 hours of time with it. So these problems could have been avoided if the proper time and resources would have been applied. They just wanted to cash in up front, release some placebo patch that won't really fix the problem, and fly under the radar.

It might not be that easy. If the problem is caused by players discovering and interacting with objects in the game world (as the Obsidian developer said) and Skyrim has a lot more objects than Oblivion (I think this was mentioned on the Making of Skyrim video), then it might be really difficult to fix the problem without drastically reducing the number of items in the world, or dramatically overhauling the save/persistence system which could have added 6 months to a year of dev time. Not saying they aren't still at fault here, but just because Oblivion didn't have the problem doesn't necessarily mean that Skyrim could be fixed in the same way.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I thought the running explanation was that they all were only given the 360 version for review. On one hand it's disappointing that there hasn't been more coverage of this, but on the other hand I don't really expect every reviewer to put 60+ hours into each version of the game, especially during the holiday season. Hopefully we start seeing some more coverage now that the issue is better known.

I'm not even talking about reviews (that's another issue), i'm just talking about an article on the problems. These problems have been known for more than two weeks now. It's also known to not be an issue that affects a small number of people. IGN did a poll and more than 50% of the people that voted reported severe problems (freezing or huge framerate drops). Why not report on this? There are videos showing that people aren't making this stuff up. They're real issues.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

Clearly the solution is:

CTRL+F "cheese wheel"
Would you like delete all instances of the actor "cheese wheel"?

 

[Demon Ice]

I for one don't blame Bethesda for this. It's Sony's fault for designing such a developer unfriendly architecture, and for limiting the amount of RAM available to devs in the PS3 to 256mb.

We should be angry at Sony for shortchanging consumers once again because they wanted to advance their own corporate interests ala CELL and Blu-Ray over what was good for the gaming industry.

Do you get mad at farmers when the restaurant you order from overcooks your steak and still charges you for it?


Please say no.

 

[highrider]

well thats not 100% fair.

The games are pretty close to enough for the first few hours. about as close as any other ps3/360 port. for the first 15/20 hours its probably the best bethesda ps3 port since oblivion.

Then this save thing ruins everything.

If bethesda spent the time to come up with a better way for there ps3 versions to save data we wouldn't be in this mess and people would just be bitching that the 360 version runs at 27fps while the ps3 version only runs at 25.

it is 100% fair. regardless of what the first 15 or 20 hours are like, the game falls apart completely with extended playtime. it is broken, and they lied about it. now that it is a known issue do you see bethesda/zenimax swinging in to action?

 

[DisenLedZep]

First video I've seen from the PS3 version and, my God... I'm beyond words.

I can't honestly believe that a game releases in this state. I never imagined that we would reach this place in the industry where overall quality is in second place, I mean, how could that framerate pass testers or quality approval?

This generation of consoles has been pretty disappointing in that matter, and I'm not blaming Sony specifically. This entire generation of consoles have been horrendous in overall quality.

Hardware problems, software problems, hacking problems, online problems.

I remember that era when you bought a game for a console and you knew in that instant that it would play just fine on you console. What the fuck happened to that? Is in part our fault for letting this kind of things happen? Will future hardware be ready for what developers really need? Don't developers have some responsibility to double and triple check if the game runs fine? Don't they have to do everything under they capabilities to make it do so, and if it doesn't work, get a workaround?

I'm... so disappoint, and scared for the next gen of consoles. But everything seems to be going downside

 

[ace3skoot]

The gaming press covering this, after giving it rave reviews, would make themselves look pretty bad (foolish and/or incompetent)... the majority of these outlets lack the integrity to admit their own mistakes.

This is why the industry is such a fucking joke.

pretty much on the nail.

 

[Satchel]

Do you get mad at farmers when the restaurant you order from overcooks your steak and still charges you for it?


Please say no.

I know what you're getting at, but I dont think that analogy works.

Wouldn't Sony technically be the restaurant? The place you sit down at eat at, and eat the steak provided by someone else?

So the PS3 is the console you sit at and play the game developed by someone else?

I'm not disagreeing about the topic at hand, and Bethesda should be held accountable for this, it's not like the PS3's limitations are new to them, but in the case of your analogy, you should probaly think of a better one.

 

[Nizz]

And this is one of the saddest parts of the situation. On some level I guess it's expected that Bethesda is quiet (especially after the Obsidian comments), but why are journalists so quiet about it?

This is something that needs to change badly. Too many situations of copy/paste reviews for both console versions of games. They play the 360 version through, maybe tear the shrink wrap off the PS3 version and pop the disc in to see it if boots up and maybe play a half hour and boom: done.

 

[chubigans]

This is something that needs to change badly. Too many situations of copy/paste reviews for both console versions of games. They play the 360 version through, maybe tear the shrink wrap off the PS3 version and pop the disc in to see it if boots up and maybe play a half hour and boom: done.

Well not really. My PS3 skyrim played great at the 15 hour mark. I bailed out to get the PC version instead, but its usually at the 20+ hour mark where you start to notice problems.

 

[conman]

The gaming press covering this, after giving it rave reviews, would make themselves look pretty bad (foolish and/or incompetent)... the majority of these outlets lack the integrity to admit their own mistakes.

This is why the industry is such a fucking joke.

The problem is how most sites handle multiplatform releases. They usually will only play through one version to completion (typically the 360) and then briefly sample the other two (if at all). But it'll still list on their site and on Metacritic for all versions. And PR firms can further limit a site's access to different version by only supplying the 360 version. The assumption is usually that any differences aren't worth mentioning, but then you run into problems exactly like this. The solution? Sites need to have some integrity and play through--to completion--all versions of a game if they intend to include that platform in their score.

Yet another reason why Metacritic is so busted. The vast majority of those PS3 scores are from sites who only ever played the 360 version. In most cases, the differences are minor. But then you run into the occasional outlier like Skyrim. And because these sites aren't going to call themselves out for this sort of irresponsible behavior, there's no one to "watch the watchmen."

Yes, it's Bethesda's fault that this happened, but it's consumer gaming sites' fault that consumers are left paying the price for it. Those sites' job is first-and-foremost to prevent consumers from being surprised by this sort of stuff and out $60+ for a busted product.

 

[Nizz]

Well not really. My PS3 skyrim played great at the 15 hour mark. I bailed out to get the PC version instead, but its usually at the 20+ hour mark where you start to notice problems.

Doesn't help in that Bethesda seemed to have sent PS3 copies in to reviewers the day the game released. If someone had already pre-ordered the game or picked it up that Friday, they wouldn't know what to expect. :/

The whole situation is really unfortunate and handled badly on Bethesda's part imo. They hid and hid the PS3 version all the way till the last moment. Had they at least gotten the PS3 version out to reviewers in advance and these issues popped up you would have had an inkling of what to expect.

You're fortunate that you had another choice of platform to play it on. But for a lot of people (myself included) that only own PS3, our options are limited.

 

[Jonsoncao]

http://twitter.com/DCDeacon/status/108594625547206656

Google'd this tweet and found this:

http://gamingeverything.com/8293/bethesda-ps3-version-of-skyrim-getting-a-ton-of-attention

David on Nov 26, 2011
Xbox mentality:
The only reason the PS3 version of Oblivion looked better (from what I had read in the past), was because of two reasons.

A.) They had already worked on the PC and 360 version long before the Ps3 version was in production and thus, they new where to make optimizations and tweak the engine to get more out of it.

B.) The Ps3′s RSX graphics chip is incapable (still is), of producing HDR and Anti-Aliasing simultaneously. I use to own an RSX for the PC, a Geforce 6xxx series and this was an annoyance and a major RSX GPU fault at the time, thus, the 6xxx series Nvidia cards were short lived…a bad decision on Sony’s behalf, to use the RSX. However, nowadays, there are workarounds to get AA and HDR to work in tandem using the CELL processor. My point is, is the fact that they only used HDR and no Anti-aliasing, they could afford to push higher resolution textures on the Ps3 version. Meanwhile, the 360 version was pushing HDR + Anti-aliasing and could not afford the higher resolution.

Skyrim is going to be a completely different story than Oblivion. Both platforms are being released simultaneously and game developers know more about developing for each system these days. Not to mention, there is more memory to work with this time around. Remember, as the PS3 and 360 mature, their code and operating systems optimized, there is more free memory to work with. The 360′s OS has shrunk down to only 35mb’s and the Ps3′s is around 40-45mb. The PS3′s OS once occupied as large as 90mb of system memory when Oblivion was in production for it. Also, the 360 development kits have changed since then. The developers 360 consoles are now 1GB, instead of 512mb RAM like the consumer models, which means, they no longer have to reserve RAM as overhead for development and debugging etc. because, now they can tap into the extra 512mb of RAM for their purposes. The reason why Microsoft released 1GB 360 development consoles, was so that developers can make full use of the system’s memory. I believe the PS3 developer consoles are still 512mb. Not to mention, the 360 has 10mb more memory than the PS3 to begin with, as it feature 10mb of EDRAM / buffer space right on the GPU, which is tremendously fast and essentially means free anti-aliasing at no cost.

ps3 mentality:
Plz everyone quiet….”uncharted 3 baby”.
P.s “god of war 3 baby” .lol xbox wats cool about it? gears 3 or allan wake come on haters or xbox fannies who gives about third parties ”
blu ray baby!!!!!

I think the above posts are pretty indicative of the two mind-sets and cultures. East Vs West, if you like.

By Zach on Nov 27, 2011
Dear David

1. Because one guy above is saying god knows what makes you looked retarded to automatically assume all ps3 owner have that “mind set”.
2. You don’t have clue what your talking about. Your off on all of that which you posted.

THE FACTS:
- Blu ray discs hold a shit ton more memory that a dvd. Bethesda already mentioned have an incredibly difficult time squeezing all of skyrim into a dvd disc. Remember FF13, or LA Noir? Multiple discs. To fit skyrim on a dvd disc they had to dumb it down to what the xbox can fit. Look it up, the ps3 versions graphics are more detailed than the 360′s.
-Everything about the 360 is old. Batterys in the controllers?! Lol, head sets that plug into the controller. If you want to upgrade your hard drive. You gotta pay a hell of a lot more money to do so for a lot less space. I have 1000gb of hard drive space for under $100. Bluetooth enabled. You are required to buy microsoft made products. They control you. You pay for “live” so that you can play online. Id say 85% of people spend there time online these days. With COD now. So why are you playing $60 for 15% of the game? Because its easy for microsoft to control all the kids that own 360s.
IF YOU COMPARE GAMES IT IS OBVIOUS! UNCHARTED 3 IS THE BEST LOOKING GAME ON CONSOLE TO THIS DAY. Why do you think it is only on the PS3? Because the 360 is missing the most essential thing. DISC SPACE. It took microsoft to fail with red ring. No wireless internet. No HDMI. Bulky cords, and a grey energy block. To finally come out with a NEW XBOX. But that is what they wanted to do. All the little kids see the new shiny black xbox and buy their 3rd, 4th, 5th even 6th xbox. Hell they dont even buy it. They ger it as a christmas present from santa every year.

Kinda hilarious...

 

[AngelSoldier]

The gaming press covering this, after giving it rave reviews, would make themselves look pretty bad (foolish and/or incompetent)... the majority of these outlets lack the integrity to admit their own mistakes.

This is why the industry is such a fucking joke.

Agreed 100%, but ....

I would love for like Joystiq, Destructoid, GameInformer, all the big names to just tear into Bethesda for their handling of the PS3 shenanigans.

 

[Duke Togo]

All this outrage....zero results. What is it going to take for this to be fixed?

 

[AngelSoldier]

Google'd this tweet and found this:

http://gamingeverything.com/8293/bethesda-ps3-version-of-skyrim-getting-a-ton-of-attention





Kinda hilarious...

What was the point of posting that here ?

 

[DR2K]

All this outrage....zero results. What is it going to take for this to be fixed?

Class action law suit to recall a broken product.