Support NeoGAF

[Nealand Liquor]

I mean aren't mags (or *rolls eyes* big awards shows) usually sorted out months before they hit print?

Features, supplementals and, for most part, major ad spaces like f/p, feature related ads, inside/outside front/back covers and double truck ads are booked well in advance; However things like page count (unless the pub goes with a standard locked page count for every issue), supporting editorial, news, house ads, and other last minute content can trickle in minutes prior to the final proof PDF's being sent off to the presses. Hell even then, depending on how far into the print and how valuable the content, or ad is (usually it's ads since many buyers/agencies are notorious for ignoring print deadlines), the presses will be stopped and new content will be added/edited.

 

[goldenpp72]

as unfortunate as this is for ps3 owners, I don't see how people can fault reviewers for not knowing this, I mean hell I don't think *I* put in 100 hours into these games, and I play them at my leisure. I also don't see why this should stop it from winning GOTY when there are 2 versions that don't have this problem, and not everyone who finishes the game will encounter it on the third.

That said, it does seem like it happens to everyone at some point, if they can't fix it they should reimburse people.

 

[kyo_daikun]

as unfortunate as this is for ps3 owners, I don't see how people can fault reviewers for not knowing this, I mean hell I don't think *I* put in 100 hours into these games, and I play them at my leisure. I also don't see why this should stop it from winning GOTY when there are 2 versions that don't have this problem, and not everyone who finishes the game will encounter it on the third.

That said, it does seem like it happens to everyone at some point, if they can't fix it they should reimburse people.

Yeah but this is the reviewers job not just a leisure thing they do now and then, to properly review a game and give an accurate and decent review I would expect them to put in around 100 hours, it started crapping out in the eurogamer review at around 65 hours so even that should have been hit pretty quickly.

 

[Evolved1]

Yeah but this is the reviewers job not just a leisure thing they do now and then, to properly review a game and give an accurate and decent review I would expect them to put in around 100 hours, it started crapping out in the eurogamer review at around 65 hours so even that should have been hit pretty quickly.

There doesn't have to be a time requirement on it, really... and it's perfectly fine if they didn't experience it in their playthrough. And if they rated the game accordingly.

However... once made aware of these issues, I believe it's their responsibility to investigate, and re-review if necessary (if the problem can be clearly demonstrated).

And it can just be for the PS3 version. I don't really care if Skyrim PC gets PC GoTY. But the PS3 version is a different story.

Features, supplementals and, for most part, major ad spaces like f/p, feature related ads, inside/outside front/back covers and double truck ads are booked well in advance; However things like page count (unless the pub goes with a standard locked page count for every issue), supporting editorial, news, house ads, and other last minute content can trickle in minutes prior to the final proof PDF's being sent off to the presses. Hell even then, depending on how far into the print and how valuable the content, or ad is (usually it's ads since many buyers/agencies are notorious for ignoring print deadlines), the presses will be stopped and new content will be added/edited.

Thanks for that. I obviously don't know much about it.

 

[Nealand Liquor]

IF any mag or e-mag has an independent section that caters to or directly references a particular subset, PS3 in this case, it is that publishers responsibility to provide information based off that subset's particular perspective, lest they wish to be deemed not only lazy & unprofessional, but completely without integrity. In other words, if IGN, GB, or whomever is going to post reviews for the PS3 they better base the review off the ps3 version.

At the last mag I worked for we did restaurant reviews & if we were to publish reviews of pizzerias based off a gawddamned Red Baron frozen Za, we'd be strung up and dangled by our flesh satchels. Now if we did this every fuckin week we'd have been out of business quicker than the WBC would protest PPV Mexican donkey shows. It's sad there is zero accountability, or consequence for that matter, in the gaming editorial world other than to the advertisers.

 

[SolidSnakex]

as unfortunate as this is for ps3 owners, I don't see how people can fault reviewers for not knowing this, I mean hell I don't think *I* put in 100 hours into these games, and I play them at my leisure. I also don't see why this should stop it from winning GOTY when there are 2 versions that don't have this problem, and not everyone who finishes the game will encounter it on the third.

Reviewers need to stop assuming that every version of the game will run the same. They should inform their readers when a publisher only sends them one version of a game. This should've been especially evident with Skyrim as Jeff from Giant Bomb mentioned that Bethesda sent out multiple copies of the game to sites. The fact that the PS3 version wasn't in there should've been very telling. When a review is posted they should make sure to mention that it only applies to that one version of the game.

Those sites should also look to update their readers when it becomes very apparent that there are serious problems with one version of the game. The issues with the PS3 version of Skyrim have been known for at least two weeks and yet there are several major gaming sites that have barely even acknowledged it. There's no excuse for not reporting it as it doesn't even require them to play the game. They can find videos of it all over YouTube and there are articles popping up on some sites that detail the problems.

As far it winning GoTY because two versions work, I think it comes down to whether or not you think it's ok to reward a company that thinks it's ok to release a game in the state that the PS3 version is in. Yes, two versions of it work, but they released three versions. And that third version is one of the worst ports on any platform...ever!

 

[teiresias]

I look forward to another Weekend Confirmed where all they do is splooge over the game and never mention any of these issues.

 

[Locke_211]

There is a fun movement started on the Bethesda forums to sabotage the PS3 version's Metacritic user score, in disgust at the company's attitude to its fans. I wouldn't normally participate in something like this, but please if you've experienced any problems with the PS3 version, go here:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim

and write a negative review. It's gone down from an 8.4 average to 8.1 just in a few hours. They're refusing to recognise anything specifically wrong with the PS3 version, so I honestly feel they deserve this.

 

[Nizz]

I look forward to another Weekend Confirmed where all they do is splooge over the game and never mention any of these issues.

You're probably right man.

 

[Patapwn]

as unfortunate as this is for ps3 owners, I don't see how people can fault reviewers for not knowing this, I mean hell I don't think *I* put in 100 hours into these games, and I play them at my leisure. I also don't see why this should stop it from winning GOTY when there are 2 versions that don't have this problem, and not everyone who finishes the game will encounter it on the third.

That said, it does seem like it happens to everyone at some point, if they can't fix it they should reimburse people.

Gaming journalists get paid to do gaming journalism. If they are not doing gaming journalism they have no reason to exist, and get paid for that matter. This is a massive story and how many sites drew attention to it? How quick did they do so?

The answer is that very few places are pushing this let alone making it an actual issue. Hell, most of the sites just copy and pasted their 360 reviews into the ps3 section thus adding to the problem. When they do shit like that they hurt the consumers that they claim to protect. Actively leading people off a cliff if you will.

So yeah, they damn well should be held accountable.

 

[Oppo]

Gaming journalists get paid to do gaming journalism. If they are not doing gaming journalism they have no reason to exist, and get paid for that matter. This is a massive story and how many sites drew attention to it? How quick did they do so?

But... it's not really. I mean we call it gaming "journalism" but it's just enthusiast press.

You cannot really realistically expect s reviewer to put in 2-3 solid weeks of playing on each game. They are NOT play testers.

 

[Fantasmo]

But... it's not really. I mean we call it gaming "journalism" but it's just enthusiast press.

You cannot really realistically expect s reviewer to put in 2-3 solid weeks of playing on each game. They are NOT play testers.

Every single gaming site worth their salt should be headlining this to protect holiday shoppers. Most are not. That's utter horseshit if a publication considers reviews as part of their content!

Example: Skyrim PS3. Avoid. Performance issues that become severe over time.

Here's a good rule of thumb. If they have a holiday buyer guide then this should be covered

 

[jony_m]

Even though I know it won't make a difference, I gave them a taste of my frustrations via their support form, after 60 hrs I'm putting this away until something gets done, it's not only lagging but freezing the system every hour or so (freezing is worse after the patch)..

http://support.bethsoft.com/eng/email.asp

 

[Psychotext]

There is a fun movement started on the Bethesda forums to sabotage the PS3 version's Metacritic user score, in disgust at the company's attitude to its fans. I wouldn't normally participate in something like this, but please if you've experienced any problems with the PS3 version, go here:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim

and write a negative review. It's gone down from an 8.4 average to 8.1 just in a few hours. They're refusing to recognise anything specifically wrong with the PS3 version, so I honestly feel they deserve this.

Interesting idea, though I doubt it'll make any difference in the least.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Reviewers need to stop assuming that every version of the game will run the same. They should inform their readers when a publisher only sends them one version of a game. This should've been especially evident with Skyrim as Jeff from Giant Bomb mentioned that Bethesda sent out multiple copies of the game to sites. The fact that the PS3 version wasn't in there should've been very telling. When a review is posted they should make sure to mention that it only applies to that one version of the game.

Those sites should also look to update their readers when it becomes very apparent that there are serious problems with one version of the game. The issues with the PS3 version of Skyrim have been known for at least two weeks and yet there are several major gaming sites that have barely even acknowledged it. There's no excuse for not reporting it as it doesn't even require them to play the game. They can find videos of it all over YouTube and there are articles popping up on some sites that detail the problems.

As far it winning GoTY because two versions work, I think it comes down to whether or not you think it's ok to reward a company that thinks it's ok to release a game in the state that the PS3 version is in. Yes, two versions of it work, but they released three versions. And that third version is one of the worst ports on any platform...ever!

StarCraft 64
Street fighter Alpha 2 (SNES)

I don't think porting has a history of retroactively making the native platform game shit, so I wouldn't be surprised if Skyrim picked up plenty of GOTY awards for PC and 360.

Reviewers definitely need to play every version, but here you're looking at a situation where someone would conceivably have to put in 200 hours of gameplay across 3 platforms in order to encounter the problem. Even if you did 30/30/30, you still probably wouldn't see it. Would you accuse someone at say, Game Informer, for being lazy if they put in 60 hours of the PC version, 40 hours of the 360 version, put in 20 on the PS3 and concluded "well, they're basically the same minus a few hiccups here and there"?

 

[SolidSnakex]

StarCraft 64
Street fighter Alpha 2 (SNES)

I don't think porting has a history of retroactively making the native platform game shit, so I wouldn't be surprised if Skyrim picked up plenty of GOTY awards for PC and 360.

I don't expect them to do it since most of them can't even be bothered to acknowledge that the problems exist in the first place.

 

[see5harp]

Yea I really don't get people getting bent outta shape over magazines, websites and blogs, when plenty of them have mentioned the versions they played and many of whom have also posted about the issues. It does suck for those that bought the PS3 version based on a glowing review of the 360 code. I'm fairly certain that Giant Bomb have acknowledged that the review was for PC/360 versions.

 

[Fantasmo]

Yea I really don't get people getting bent outta shape over magazines, websites and blogs, when plenty of them have mentioned the versions they played and many of whom have also posted about the issues. It does suck for those that bought the PS3 version based on a glowing review of the 360 code. I'm fairly certain that Giant Bomb have acknowledged that the review was for PC/360 versions.

If every industry worked this way review sites wouldn't exist. Imagine a consumer reports that didn't test fully? Game pubs and sites don't deserve backlash, but they should report this, they owe it to shoppers, and their own image also. Reporting it is all I ask. At least try to protect people from making a time/money mistake.

 

[Nizz]

Yea I really don't get people getting bent outta shape over magazines, websites and blogs, when plenty of them have mentioned the versions they played and many of whom have also posted about the issues. It does suck for those that bought the PS3 version based on a glowing review of the 360 code. I'm fairly certain that Giant Bomb have acknowledged that the review was for PC/360 versions.

I went to their site a couple of minutes ago and checked out their Skyrim review. They state the review is for the PC and 360 versions of the game. The only mention I see of the PS3 version is the platforms the game is available on. Not one mention/acknowledgement of the PS3 version in the review.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

I don't expect them to do it since most of them can't even be bothered to acknowledge that the problems exist in the first place.

SFA2 SNES suffered from terrible load times, smaller sprites, flickering, garbled sound, it was missing about half of the frames of animation (making some combos literally impossible), and it still chugged like a mofo. Damn if I didn't pour hours and hours into it anyway before I could get my hands on a "real" version.

SFA2 isn't a bad game because the SNES version is fucking garbage.

Skyrim obviously should not have been released in its current state on PS3, but the PS3 version doesn't erase the goodwill of the other two versions.

(Note: I have not played Skyrim or any ES title, I am hardly a Bethesda shill)

 

[ZephyrFate]

I think it does. Bethesda shouldn't get accolades for releasing a broken product on one of the platforms it decided to release software on. I don't care how good the PC/360 versions are, this shouldn't be rewarded.

 

[conman]

Reviewers need to stop assuming that every version of the game will run the same. They should inform their readers when a publisher only sends them one version of a game. This should've been especially evident with Skyrim as Jeff from Giant Bomb mentioned that Bethesda sent out multiple copies of the game to sites. The fact that the PS3 version wasn't in there should've been very telling. When a review is posted they should make sure to mention that it only applies to that one version of the game.

Absolutely. It would be such an easy thing to do. And while gaming sites often cower in fear from publishers and PR firms who might cut them off from assets, previews, interviews, or review copies, they needn't fear in this situation. Just review what publishers send them. If a publisher wants a PS3 version reviewed, then send the PS3 version. Simple.

All that needs to happen is gaming sites need to have some balls and some integrity. But maybe that's expecting too much. This is why the whole "journalism" debate pisses me off. Not because I care whether we call these writers "journalists" or not. But because the instant that one of these writers says that they're not a "journalist," they feel like it gives them free reign to act like boneheads with no sense of pride or responsibility. Fine, we get it. You're not a "journalist." But that doesn't mean you're off the hook and not accountable to your readers.

IMO I still see this as a failure of the gaming press and blame them far more than I blame Bethesda. Yes, Bethesda screwed up and they should know better. But the press is meant to be the "check" that keeps these errors from getting to the consumer. They're the SEC to the Bethesda's Goldman Sachs. If the press had done their job, you can bet that there would already have been a recall and sales would have been adversely affected.

 

[FINALBOSS]

So I sent Pete Hines (@dcdeacon) VP of Marketing and PR at Bethesda the following tweet:

F1NALBOSS
@dcdeacon: FUCK YOU and your lies.


To which he replied--

dcdeacon
@F1NALBOSS HEY! With an attitude like that you'll never get free horse armor.
@F1NALBOSS I'm sorry we never got the chance to know each other better. I know now that'll never happen.

 

[Hex]

Even though I know it won't make a difference, I gave them a taste of my frustrations via their support form, after 60 hrs I'm putting this away until something gets done, it's not only lagging but freezing the system every hour or so (freezing is worse after the patch)..

http://support.bethsoft.com/eng/email.asp

I went ahead and gave them a bit of my opinion also on it.
I am lucky and not having any issues (yet) and have been loving the game but the fact is that it is shitty that there is even the remotest concern that I may run into an issue, especially after investing so much time into a game.
There is no excuse for this kind of thing this far into a systems life cycle and it is just sloppy and lazy.
It is made even shittier by the fact again that Microsoft has money hatted the first load of DLC whatever it may be so PS3 users get the full AtM treatment.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

So I sent Pete Hines (@dcdeacon) VP of Marketing and PR at Bethesda the following tweet:

F1NALBOSS
@dcdeacon: FUCK YOU and your lies.


To which he replied--

dcdeacon
@F1NALBOSS HEY! With an attitude like that you'll never get free horse armor.
@F1NALBOSS I'm sorry we never got the chance to know each other better. I know now that'll never happen.

keep up the good work

 

[Conflict NZ]

So I sent Pete Hines (@dcdeacon) VP of Marketing and PR at Bethesda the following tweet:

F1NALBOSS
@dcdeacon: FUCK YOU and your lies.


To which he replied--

dcdeacon
@F1NALBOSS HEY! With an attitude like that you'll never get free horse armor.
@F1NALBOSS I'm sorry we never got the chance to know each other better. I know now that'll never happen.

Pathetic...

 

[sleepykyo]

So I sent Pete Hines (@dcdeacon) VP of Marketing and PR at Bethesda the following tweet:

F1NALBOSS
@dcdeacon: FUCK YOU and your lies.


To which he replied--

dcdeacon
@F1NALBOSS HEY! With an attitude like that you'll never get free horse armor.
@F1NALBOSS I'm sorry we never got the chance to know each other better. I know now that'll never happen.

Regardless of if Pete has any candor, got to love his wit. Love that free horse armor response.

 

[Violater]

I got a good chuckle


The_Extractor_ John...
@
@DCDeacon eurogamer.net/articles/digit… He does have a point, Skyrim shouldn't have been released in this state. You guys done goof'd.
4 Dec

DCDeecon Pete Hines
@
@The_Extractor_ Hey kid. We released a product fit for our audience. And since that audience is retarded 12 year olds the game is perfect.

 

[MacBosse]

I got a good chuckle


The_Extractor_ John...
@
@DCDeacon eurogamer.net/articles/digit… He does have a point, Skyrim shouldn't have been released in this state. You guys done goof'd.
4 Dec

DCDeecon Pete Hines
@
@The_Extractor_ Hey kid. We released a product fit for our audience. And since that audience is retarded 12 year olds the game is perfect.

Wait wait wait ... did Pete Hines just really say that? You must be joking right?

 

[Kylarean]

I got a good chuckle


The_Extractor_ John...
@
@DCDeacon eurogamer.net/articles/digit… He does have a point, Skyrim shouldn't have been released in this state. You guys done goof'd.
4 Dec

DCDeecon Pete Hines
@
@The_Extractor_ Hey kid. We released a product fit for our audience. And since that audience is retarded 12 year olds the game is perfect.

Hah. The fake Pete's can be funny.

 

[FINALBOSS]

keep up the good work

High-five!

 

[Pai Pai Master]

So I sent Pete Hines (@dcdeacon) VP of Marketing and PR at Bethesda the following tweet:

F1NALBOSS
@dcdeacon: FUCK YOU and your lies.


To which he replied--

dcdeacon
@F1NALBOSS HEY! With an attitude like that you'll never get free horse armor.
@F1NALBOSS I'm sorry we never got the chance to know each other better. I know now that'll never happen.

Why should we expect publishers to respect gamers if this is how we voice our concerns?

 

[FINALBOSS]

Why should we expect publishers to respect gamers if this is how we voice our concerns?

It was a joke, obviously.


And they don't respect us voicing our concerns with respect like in this thread and various other media outlets. It's never going to change.

 

[Neuromancer]

So I sent Pete Hines (@dcdeacon) VP of Marketing and PR at Bethesda the following tweet:

F1NALBOSS
@dcdeacon: FUCK YOU and your lies.


To which he replied--

dcdeacon
@F1NALBOSS HEY! With an attitude like that you'll never get free horse armor.
@F1NALBOSS I'm sorry we never got the chance to know each other better. I know now that'll never happen.

Haha

 

[[Nintex]]

I think the official PR response is even worse than the fake one:

DCDeacon Pete Hines
@
@KingMyro Not ignoring you, this just isn't the way to report or bring up bugs. I've said that several times now.

 

[GavinGT]

I think it does. Bethesda shouldn't get accolades for releasing a broken product on one of the platforms it decided to release software on. I don't care how good the PC/360 versions are, this shouldn't be rewarded.

Now that's just silly. Being named GOTY has nothing to do with a game being consistently excellent across all platforms. I mean, I understand being mad at Bethesda if you're a PS3 owner, but that doesn't change how awesome the experience is on other platforms.

If the award were called "Multiplatform Game of the Year", sure.

Would you disqualify a game from GOTY candidacy if it had a subpar handheld or iPad version? Or does this ruling only pertain to platforms that are relevant to you?

 

[Mammoth Jones]

So then my question is why wasn't the PS3 version getting scores of 4's instead of 9's like the 360 and PC version?

It reminds me what happened to me with Dragon Age 1 for PS3. Framerate issues to the point where it just wasn't fun. Yet there was barely any mention of it in the reviews I read.

People are paying a LOT of money for these games. A 60$ a pop, expecting a working product isn't "entitlement", it's fucking expected.

People aren't paying full price for 10fps and in some cases 0fps. They rushed their game and more gaming "journalists" should be calling them out on it. The industry needs to highlight shitty ports and call them what they are: bad product not worthy of your money.

 

[FINALBOSS]

So then my question is why wasn't the PS3 version getting scores of 4's instead of 9's like the 360 and PC version?

It reminds me what happened to me with Dragon Age 1 for PS3. Framerate issues to the point where it just wasn't fun. Yet there was barely any mention of it in the reviews I read.

People are paying a LOT of money for these games. A 60$ a pop, expecting a working product isn't "entitlement", it's fucking expected.

People aren't paying full price for 10fps and in some cases 0fps. They rushed their game and more gaming "journalists" should be calling them out on it. The industry needs to highlight shitty ports and call them what they are: bad product not worthy of your money.

From what we understand, most, if not all, review sites (even ones that requested PS3 copies) were sent the 360 copy of the game. Another "hint" that Bethesda knew about the PS3 problems and tried to postpone its knowledge until the bulk of sales were over.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

From what we understand, most, if not all, review sites (even ones that requested PS3 copies) were sent the 360 copy of the game. Another "hint" that Bethesda knew about the PS3 problems and tried to postpone its knowledge until the bulk of sales were over.

So they put out reviews for the PS3 version without actually playing the PS3 version? They just played the 360 version and assumed it was the same?

Or am I misunderstanding you?

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

So they put out reviews for the PS3 version without actually playing the PS3 version? They just played the 360 version and assumed it was the same?

Or am I misunderstanding you?

Apparently a lot of them did yes. Pretty messed up in my opinion.

 

[centracore]

IGN just posted a nice write up on the situation and is demanding answers from Bethesda - I doubt they'll hear anything, but at least they're helping to keep this in the public eye.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1214016p1.html

Also, suspicions confirmed..

When IGN reviewed Skyrim, it's surely significant that we were given free access to the Xbox 360 and PC versions prior to launch, but had to buy a PS3 copy from retail after it was released to the world.

 

[DownWithTheShip]

Can we assume that this is the reason we didn't see the PS3 version in action until release?

I was torn between the 360 and PS3 version because of the texture issue. Glad I chose 360.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

PATHETIC AND ABSURD

Fucking hell Beth, come out and just say you were embarrassed or just were too incompetent to delay the PS3 version. Or you just plain suck at working with your own engine.

 

[DCharlie]

yeah, i chose the PS3 version because of the early "textures on X360" noise. gah.

My PC is fried and i'm not ready to upgrade, so i guess it's time to order the X360 version. I've only got about 8 hours in so no biggie just yet.

 

[freenudemacusers]

IGN just posted a nice write up on the situation and is demanding answers from Bethesda - I doubt they'll hear anything, but at least they're helping to keep this in the public eye.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1214016p1.html

Also, suspicions confirmed..

Well fuck IGN if not getting a ps3 copy was such a big deal for you why didn't you make a stink about it until now? Movies blocked from critics until release are usually assumed to be shit, did this not occur to you as well?

 

[Speevy]

This is so bad that I'm actually considering a PC version to play on my Intel Graphics 3000 PC.

Spoiler

not really

 

[Takuan]

Nevermind. Link works now, was getting IGN's 404 image earlier. It's kinda funny to see the "9.5 IGN SCORE - Amazing" right beside a damning article.

 

[falconzss]

yeah, i chose the PS3 version because of the early "textures on X360" noise. gah.

My PC is fried and i'm not ready to upgrade, so i guess it's time to order the X360 version. I've only got about 8 hours in so no biggie just yet.

Bethesda's favourite customer right there.

 

[3rdamention]

IGN just posted a nice write up on the situation and is demanding answers from Bethesda - I doubt they'll hear anything, but at least they're helping to keep this in the public eye.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1214016p1.html

Also, suspicions confirmed..

When I saw that, I gave two thumbs up to IGN (they normally get two middle fingers up from me). I always bash IGN, but had to give them some credit for not only reporting the story, but demanding a statement and almost drawing a line in the sand. That took some balls on their part, or at least the writers part, for sure.

Meanwhile, my opened copy just sold on Ebay for $51 shipped, lol.

 

[Shadybiz]

yeah, i chose the PS3 version because of the early "textures on X360" noise. gah.

Exactly why I got mine on PS3 as well. Ugh...never again a day one Bethesda purchase. I would like to get the PC version, but I would actually have to PAY Bethesda in order to do that, so I guess I'll wait for the used 360 version to drop in price a little bit.