Wrong. They knowingly released a game on a system that they knew the game engine wasn't optimized for. They sold a game under false pretenses. Fraud.ResonanceSD said:
Dev explains why Skyrim lag wont get fixed.
- Thread starter Ilikemilkshake
- Start date
Recommended Videos
FUCKING....FUCK!
I...how can they..... I paid....
FUCK!
excuse my lck of eloquence, I feel tad ripped the FUCK off.
I...how can they..... I paid....
FUCK!
excuse my lck of eloquence, I feel tad ripped the FUCK off.
WOW! Talk about apologists.DalekJaas said:
Why is it that when I play Uncharted 2 on that same system, it works fine? Why is it that when I watch a Blu-Ray or a DVD on that same system, it works fine?
I guess there is a conspiracy, PS3's were programmed by Sony in an update to run Skyrim badly. Is that the case?
As entertaining as your master race bullshit is, you're failing to realize the general concept here.ResonanceSD said:
Here's the real problem: Bethesda should know EXACTLY what these consoles are capable of. So how do they fuck this up? This is the equivalent of a PC gamer trying to put BF3 onto a machine still running Windows 95. Anyone who can read the System Requirements on the box of a PC game is now more competant than Bethesda.
If they can't keep the hardware limitations for platforms they're releasing games onto (that includes PC's) in mind, they're not fit to be developing games.
/PC Gaming Master Race Gloat
No but seriously, a game as large as Skyrim really shouldn't have been put on consoles to begin with and I don't mean that in a derogatory way. There are just some games that don't work on consoles either due to the controller or the hardware limitations.
No but seriously, a game as large as Skyrim really shouldn't have been put on consoles to begin with and I don't mean that in a derogatory way. There are just some games that don't work on consoles either due to the controller or the hardware limitations.
For the last time, it was designed for a console, the 360. So that statement doesn't make any sense.Jodah said:
And in designing it for such a wimpy piece of hardware, the game has been left totally gimped!RedEyesBlackGamer said:
EDIT: Too many sacrifices have had to be made. As a PC gamer, I'd happily wait another 6 months so they could sort it out for us properly.
Oh well, if the console crowd start to abandon Bethesda, maybe they'll care about us again!
RedEyesBlackGamer said:
Aeonknight said:
To all of you, if you feel particularly hard-done by, go ahead and sue them. Go on, I'll wait. You can claim that the game was sold and wasn't fit for the purpose advertised.Crono1973 said:
To Crono the 38 year old, I did know. I thought it was a good wake up call that Bethesda was letting everyone know that consoles are fundamentally obsolete, and included that message in the architecture of their game. I also knew that they kept full PC mod support in the game.
To all of you, know why there isn't a console gaming master race meme? Because it's not even slightly plausible =D
It runs fine on the 360, the console it was designed for. This is discussing the PS3 version, champ.Private Custard said:
I think the message Bethesda is trying to send is that they have chosen to develop games for the XBOX first and PC and PS3 second. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the next Bethesda open world game didn't come with the Construction Set. That's just what happens when developers follow the money.ResonanceSD said:
In this case, they are following the XBOX money and the PS3 is also getting neglected.
I just had a thought, I'm not sure if it's been said or if it would help. Perhaps Beth could release some sort of options menu that could minimise what's in the game. So you can remove useless items, or even useful items that you'll never use or perhaps could do without. It could be just a massive list with check boxes. E.g.
[]Jugs, plates, etc.
[]Food
[]Iron weapons
[]Iron armor
[]Alchemy ingrediants.
[]Crabs
[]Deer
It could be split up into different pages, e.g. Monsters, Misc Items, Armor and Weapons... Then there could be another option that perhaps locks some or most NPCs into their houses, another that'll reduce the amount of bandits, bears, etc,. that you encounter or that the game loads at any specific time.
Sure, it might sound stupid to dumb down the game like that. But if there's no other option, wouldn't you atleast like the option to play the game? Of course Beth should still offer a refund. They should send a message to anyone on the PS3 who LOADS the game saying they should seek a refund if they are unhappy with the product.
[]Jugs, plates, etc.
[]Food
[]Iron weapons
[]Iron armor
[]Alchemy ingrediants.
[]Crabs
[]Deer
It could be split up into different pages, e.g. Monsters, Misc Items, Armor and Weapons... Then there could be another option that perhaps locks some or most NPCs into their houses, another that'll reduce the amount of bandits, bears, etc,. that you encounter or that the game loads at any specific time.
Sure, it might sound stupid to dumb down the game like that. But if there's no other option, wouldn't you atleast like the option to play the game? Of course Beth should still offer a refund. They should send a message to anyone on the PS3 who LOADS the game saying they should seek a refund if they are unhappy with the product.
I'm betting the 360 will last a little longer than the PS3, due to the way it's built. But the lag issue will occur, it's inevitably inevitable. Too little RAM in both consoles.......unless you're the type of gamer that closes all the doors behind you and leaves everything exactly how you found it when exploring.RedEyesBlackGamer said:
I have an image in my mind now, of me walking into a ruin and bumping into a guy wearing full Daedric, tidying up because he was silly enough to FUS RO DAH in the direction of a nicely laid out table!
And here's PC gamers like me, with 16gb of RAM and GPUs the size of small cars, duping in 55+ dragons, because there's not a lot else that will stress things out!
I don't see why there can't be a toggle to set the game to forget / reset what is in containers and pockets except for a few choice (e.g. quest) items in order to free up ram. Leave it up to the consumer to choose between realism and performance and all it would take is one extra procedure worth of programming:
if(reset and condition){contents := init[crateid];}
if(reset and condition){contents := init[crateid];}