Bethesda "Disappointed" There's No PS3 Skyrim DLC Yet

[DracoSuave]

A year ago, they said they had a deal with Microsoft to delay PS3 DLC development, and they repeated it later extending the time.

If they don't deserve to have customers feel slighted by their actions, then why did they cash the cheque?

Source?

As far as I know they have the first three DLC as exclusive and the release of the other DLC is done at least a month after Xbox.
Unless you can find where it says specifically development then I'm going with "No, you're wrong."

That's just splitting hairs. They were paid to delay PS3 release, and the PS3's release is delayed. There's no reason to trust them on this whatsoever.

And I agree that it's worth the wait, but it really pisses me off to no end when some dumbasses completely swear off all things Bethesda just because they can't wait a few weeks for a patch or DLC with them CLEARLY being the long-time loyal fans they are, waited almost 6 years from Oblivion to Skyrim.

Actually you have people who WANT to give money to Bethesda, but can't because they're saying that Microsoft's money is worth more. Is it wrong for them to decide 'Oh, well, I guess you don't want my money then.'

 

[Sansha]

Deadly serious question here. No trolling, no wit, no elitism or bullshit:

Have you considered just getting it for the PC? You already have one, and it's honestly not hard or expensive to get the necessary hardware to run Skyrim. It plays better (in my opinion), and the visuals and themes are better.

 

[Kroxile]

I'm trading mine in as soon as I get a day off and time to do so.

I'll buy the goty edition when it inevitably comes out used just to get my cake and eat it too. Fuck you, Bethesda

Paying for their game once and then promising to play future versions anyways isn't exactly something I think they feel extremely slighted over. Just sayin'.

I think you missed the part where I said "used" meaning they aren't getting dime one of the purchase. Also, by trading in my copy I'll allow someone else to buy it used and further screw bethesda out of money.

Will it matter in the end? Probably not, but it feels like a victory, however insignificant, to me.

 

[Parugraph]

So let me get this straight , Microsoft paid Bethesda to delay ps3 DLC isn't that against some rules of fair competition or something?

Owell then il just leave my Skyrim alone for now and focus on other games to play.

 

[F'Angus]

Right, I have Skyrim on PS3, I waited till january to buy it so that it was fairly patched...but seriously this is stupid.

I don't usually buy dlc but I probably would've bought Dawnguard (but not hearthfire) but I'm just bored of waiting so I spent the money I was saving for dawnguard on Arkham City instead, well worth it.

 

[Vampire cat]

Honestly, I don't see the diference between this, and PC-gamers having to wait to get a poorly ported version of games that have been out on the PS3 and the 360 for ages. Often the wait for these games is extremely long (something like half a year to a full year isn't uncommon in my experience), and at times the damned thing is nearly unplayable.

Is there a diference?

Not that I agree with having to wait regardless of console I'm on and game/DLC I'm waiting for, but I do actually feel that the whole deal around this is getting a bit silly. Of course, I'm not allowed to say that =p.

I guess having to deal with Wargaming.net's IMPOSSIBLE to understand way of doing business has hardnened me to this kind of thing. They would announce a release date for something that didn't actually show up until a month to half a year after they said it would, and in that same half-year period the Russian server would be enjoying that very update, and several updates into our future.

If they want to hurt themselves I'm not going to flail my arms about it. There are other things I can play while waiting. Many of my favorite games currently are cheap-as-dirt or even free ones, so when Dawnguard wouldn't show for PC until "later" I wasn't bothered. I'm not entirely convinced the whining and complaining is in it's place on this one, but feel free to disagree with and argue with me about that X3.

 

[faefrost]

I just wish they had a tool that would let me export my PS3 save games to a PC format.

 

[Trishbot]

I think Bethesda has fallen prey to what I call "Sony E3 2006" syndrome. Meaning, they've become arrogant and prideful and thing that fans will just lap up anything with their brand on it, no matter how much it costs, how poorly it runs, how badly they support it, how much hassle customers get, and how much fans whine about it.

... because, at the end of the day, Bethesda's Skyrim walked away with multiple Game of the Year awards, despite the PS3 version being horribly broken, if not unplayable, at the time they accepted these awards. And they sold their millions of copies and made their profit.

Let me ask... when someone already pays you for an unfinished product, and you don't really feel like completing it because it's, you know, hard work and you have their money already, where's the motivation to improve it on that one particular system?

Bethesda defenders will simply go "well, their games NEVER run on PS3 very well, so you know, nothing unusual here" as if that justifies it.

Hold their feet to the fire. Demand a better quality product. And stop rewarding them for a half-assed job (both the gaming media and the players).

 

[CheckD3]

What bothers me most about this is that by taking the money and releasing it on X360 first, it says that they care about some customers more than others thanks to money telling them who's most important. Hopefully Microsoft's, "investment", only works for Dawnguard and the Hearthfire gets released on all platforms simultaneously

 

[Cecilthedarkknight_234]

I"m going to be blunt and say this if you want to play bethesda games either get the PC or Xbox versions. The ps3 is not on their high priority list due to developmental problems on the hardware so either switch over now or give up playing these games on this platform.

 

[squ1re]

PS3 players can have Ubisoft. Let us PC players keep Bethesda. =)

It's not about PC v PS3 v 360. It's about a company delivering on the content they have said they would deliver. Just because it's PS3 owners getting shafted this time doesn't mean that it won't be PC gamers of 360 owners next.

I never claimed that it was about some stupid sense of competition. I simply said that PC gamers are getting the shit end from most of the publishers these days because of piracy. If one or two of them (cdprojekt...yaay) still wants to favor the PC as a platform, then good for them. PS3 gamers are really the last people that should be complaining about favoritism. Xbox gamers have to pay for XBL and PC gamers have to deal with shitty DRM.

Also, I'm gathering from most of the posts here and other places that PS3 gamers don't play Skyrim, don't like it, and didn't intend on purchasing the DLC anyways because of bugs or something. So why does it matter? Or is that just the, "fine, I didn't want it any ways" sulkiness?

I think it is the "fine, I didn't want it anyways" sulkiness at this point. And as far as 360 owners having to pay for XBL is not something forced on them. It isn't PS3 owners fault that MS decided to charge their users for their online service. PS3 offers two options free and premium (PlayStation Plus) and I honestly thought MS might switch to a similar format as a retaliation to that however they instead just added more content. And I sympathize with the plight PC gamers currently find themselves in it truly sucks.

 

[squ1re]

This is one of the reasons for why you don't show favourites when it comes to platform DLC. They should have held back the Xbox 360 and PC versions and released them all at the same time.

Hopefully when you say "show favourites" you mean "don't sell exclusivity for the first three DLC" because that's what it is and not them being all crazy Xbox fanboys.

I call bullshit. They just don't want to do it.

Yes because supplying a buggy AAA title to the fans of a certain system and leaving it in a state of disrepair is the best way to run a business.

While the development kit for the PS3 is difficult it shouldn't qualify as an excuse to (as some people see it) "neglect" your customers. The real salt in the wound comes from the fact that Bethesda has announced a second DLC without even any window of release for Dawnguard on the PS3. That is what really stings because it implies a lack of caring to get the DLC on the PS3. The excuse of the development kit being really difficult can only carry so long in a situation like this. The fact that it has been able to carry as long as it has in our current culture of instantaneous satisfaction is remarkable in and of itself. I say excuse of a tough development kit because obviously they can get it working when need be or else Skyrim on PS3 would still be the mess it was upon release. So it is understandable for PS3 owners to be a little upset at this news.

There is no news of a release for PS3 because Bethesda don't want to give you the inferior product everyone is whining about.
I mean sure if you want to rush them but right now Bethesda is in a damned if you do and damned if you don't state.
Plus Dawnguard brings some entire new mechanics to the table, there is a whole lot going on and Bethesda clearly need time to fix it.

Maybe I'm just being naive, but I like to think they're trying to make sure we avoid the various game-breaking issues that plagued the original release.

*claps* Well done for being reasonable. +10 respects.

I think we would all like to believe that. However, when the DLC in question released at the beginning of June (so source code is to a point deemed acceptable for launch and now it is just a matter of porting) and now it is almost September with no word or release window even announced is where things begin to break down. Especially when a second DLC is announced it kind of comes off like a big "fuck you, we don't care" to the angered consumer base. But that is just speculation, the real "fuck you, we don't care" comes from the fact that when pressed about the issue by a consumer the answer received isn't even an answer but instead a statement that they are disappointed as well. That is like going to work knowing you haven't finished a report or going to class without your homework and when the boss/instructor asks where it is you say "I'm sorry, I'm disappointed in me too." Didn't they just finish jumping all over Interplay for basically the same situation concerning a Fallout MMO?

Second time I quoted you I know but I'm just working down the page.

What do you expect them to say though? Do expect them to do a press release of "Nah fuck it, we don't care about PS3 tbh" or would you rather have them say "Actually yeah we're disappointed that our PS3 version is sub par when compared to the others and that the ps3 users are getting rough deal"
I mean you can be a cynic all you want but that is just going a little far on the whole deal.

Of course I don't expect a press conference, or to come out and say "we just don't care" that's just bad PR. I just simply wish for an update of some kind as to the status of a product they said they would deliver. It's just disheartening when they come off as not really caring. I have a lot of respect for Bethesda and the games they produce whether it be Elder Scrolls or not so it is just disheartening when they come off really defensive when asked about a game and the release of a second DLC when some people haven't even been able to play the first.

A year ago, they said they had a deal with Microsoft to delay PS3 DLC development, and they repeated it later extending the time.

If they don't deserve to have customers feel slighted by their actions, then why did they cash the cheque?

Source?

As far as I know they have the first three DLC as exclusive and the release of the other DLC is done at least a month after Xbox.
Unless you can find where it says specifically development then I'm going with "No, you're wrong."

 

[Lyri]

That's just splitting hairs. They were paid to delay PS3 release, and the PS3's release is delayed. There's no reason to trust them on this whatsoever.

That deal they made also includes PC release date being at least a month after Xbox too, I don't see how you're making leap to such a conclusion. This isn't some slimey deal they made to delay development on PS3.

I really hope you don't think they're doing this on purpose.

Of course I don't expect a press conference, or to come out and say "we just don't care" that's just bad PR. I just simply wish for an update of some kind as to the status of a product they said they would deliver. It's just disheartening when they come off as not really caring. I have a lot of respect for Bethesda and the games they produce whether it be Elder Scrolls or not so it is just disheartening when they come off really defensive when asked about a game and the release of a second DLC when some people haven't even been able to play the first.

They already came out and said at the release of Dawnguard on PC that the PS3 version is still buggy and isn't working as intended.
That to me shows commitment to giving PS3 users a better Skyrim experience, I doubt press releases every 2 weeks saying "it still doesn't work" will make matters better.

 

[DracoSuave]

That's just splitting hairs. They were paid to delay PS3 release, and the PS3's release is delayed. There's no reason to trust them on this whatsoever.

That deal they made also includes PC release date being at least a month after Xbox too, I don't see how you're making leap to such a conclusion. This isn't some slimey deal they made to delay development on PS3.

I really hope you don't think they're doing this on purpose.

They certainly could have tried harder to get things to work for the PS3. And they DID take money to delay it in the first place, didn't they? Of course the windows copy came out on time... no sweat.

And we're talking expansion data here, they're not coming out with a new game engine are they? It's just extra scripting code which we're to believe is magically munged up on the playstation, even tho isn't this part of the code, most of it, supposed to be platform agnostic?

The thing is, because they took money to delay it, that means they didn't put as much resources into developing it sooner. This means that work that should have been done and quality controlled earlier simply was not. That means that delays compound onto more delays, which lead us to the situation we are in now.

The bottom line is, they took money from Microsoft to not work on it, now not enough work has been done. It's a pretty simple logical step. And they will likely continue to be taking that money, and Microsoft, seeing that they have this same habit of delaying PS3 releases FAR beyond reasonable, will be more than glad to keep paying Bethesda to do it.

Because of this, the company does not see what they do as wrong... which is why you see apologies NOW instead of a year ago when they SHOULD have just said no to Microsoft.

 

[Lyri]

They certainly could have tried harder to get things to work for the PS3. And they DID take money to delay it in the first place, didn't they? Of course the windows copy came out on time... no sweat.

And we're talking expansion data here, they're not coming out with a new game engine are they? It's just extra scripting code which we're to believe is magically munged up on the playstation, even tho isn't this part of the code, most of it, supposed to be platform agnostic?

The thing is, because they took money to delay it, that means they didn't put as much resources into developing it sooner. This means that work that should have been done and quality controlled earlier simply was not. That means that delays compound onto more delays, which lead us to the situation we are in now.

The bottom line is, they took money from Microsoft to not work on it, now not enough work has been done. It's a pretty simple logical step. And they will likely continue to be taking that money, and Microsoft, seeing that they have this same habit of delaying PS3 releases FAR beyond reasonable, will be more than glad to keep paying Bethesda to do it.

Because of this, the company does not see what they do as wrong... which is why you see apologies NOW instead of a year ago when they SHOULD have just said no to Microsoft.

You actually believe what you're saying, that's a little uncomforting.

You are deliberately rewording your argument to mean something completely different than what is actually true, either through your own ignorance or you're just not able to grasp it.
There is a monumental difference between delaying a release date and delaying development of the game, what you are saying is that Microsoft paid them to "Not working on Skyrim PS3 version" and this is factually incorrect and completely undermines your entire argument.

The PS3 is a completely different platform from xbox and PC, even Valve went on to say that it is horrible to work with and code. This is no excuse by any means but it gives you understanding (which you seem to either wilfully ignore) for the sake of bolstering your argument. Again deliberately dumbing down something to its simplest terms, it isn't as simple as "some code" that is "magically munged up".
Yes they had Oblivion on the PS3 and that worked ok(?) but now Skyrim is running on Bethesda's brand new creation engine, something that has never been adapted and coded for PS3 prior to this point.
So technically, yes they're doing a whole lot of things like fixing the bugs in the first game and trying to keep Dawnguard expansion bug free which IS a good thing and to make sure that the new data doesn't mess up old data.

The bottom line is you're absolutely incorrect at every level.
By your logic Bethesda wouldn't have even started developing Dawnguard for PS3 yet because "Microsoft paid them not too" which is completely incorrect because Dawnguard is near done/done for the PS3 but doesn't run as well as Bethesda wanted it to do so.

Put down your conspiracy theories and educate yourself and stop spreading your misinformation.

 

[DracoSuave]

They certainly could have tried harder to get things to work for the PS3. And they DID take money to delay it in the first place, didn't they? Of course the windows copy came out on time... no sweat.

And we're talking expansion data here, they're not coming out with a new game engine are they? It's just extra scripting code which we're to believe is magically munged up on the playstation, even tho isn't this part of the code, most of it, supposed to be platform agnostic?

The thing is, because they took money to delay it, that means they didn't put as much resources into developing it sooner. This means that work that should have been done and quality controlled earlier simply was not. That means that delays compound onto more delays, which lead us to the situation we are in now.

The bottom line is, they took money from Microsoft to not work on it, now not enough work has been done. It's a pretty simple logical step. And they will likely continue to be taking that money, and Microsoft, seeing that they have this same habit of delaying PS3 releases FAR beyond reasonable, will be more than glad to keep paying Bethesda to do it.

Because of this, the company does not see what they do as wrong... which is why you see apologies NOW instead of a year ago when they SHOULD have just said no to Microsoft.

You actually believe what you're saying, that's a little uncomforting.

You are deliberately rewording your argument to mean something completely different than what is actually true, either through your own ignorance or you're just not able to grasp it.
There is a monumental difference between delaying a release date and delaying development of the game, what you are saying is that Microsoft paid them to "Not working on Skyrim PS3 version" and this is factually incorrect and completely undermines your entire argument.

The PS3 is a completely different platform from xbox and PC, even Valve went on to say that it is horrible to work with and code. This is no excuse by any means but it gives you understanding (which you seem to either wilfully ignore) for the sake of bolstering your argument. Again deliberately dumbing down something to its simplest terms, it isn't as simple as "some code" that is "magically munged up".
Yes they had Oblivion on the PS3 and that worked ok(?) but now Skyrim is running on Bethesda's brand new creation engine, something that has never been adapted and coded for PS3 prior to this point.
So technically, yes they're doing a whole lot of things like fixing the bugs in the first game and trying to keep Dawnguard expansion bug free which IS a good thing and to make sure that the new data doesn't mess up old data.

The bottom line is you're absolutely incorrect at every level.
By your logic Bethesda wouldn't have even started developing Dawnguard for PS3 yet because "Microsoft paid them not too" which is completely incorrect because Dawnguard is near done/done for the PS3 but doesn't run as well as Bethesda wanted it to do so.

Put down your conspiracy theories and educate yourself and stop spreading your misinformation.

You're absolutely right, what was I thinking. They get paid to delay the release of something, and I'm foolish for believing a delay in release could be related in some way to the release date being paid to be late.

How silly of me.

 

[Lyri]

You're absolutely right, what was I thinking. They get paid to delay the release of something, and I'm foolish for believing a delay in release could be related in some way to the release date being paid to be late.

How silly of me.

Quoting you directly.

The thing is, because they took money to delay it, that means they didn't put as much resources into developing it sooner.

So once Microsoft bought a months exclusivity for the first three DLC for Skyrim, Bethesda's PS3 team took the month off, right?

No.

Every version was developed at the same time, the release dates were staggered to allow the Xbox to have exclusivity for one month.
That was the deal - Dawnguard was always being developed and actively worked on during this time.