What do you think of the DLC situation?

#31LinkLuigiPosted 11/7/2012 1:19:37 PM
cynic79 posted...
To be honest, I'm not sure Skyrim should have even been released for the PS3. There were pre-existing problems with their games running properly on the PS3, and Bethesda should have at least made some effort to insure that they would be able to deliver DLC on the system.

Sony deserves their share of blame for the problems inherent in the PS3's design, but Bethesda was well aware of those problems. If they had reason to believe that the PS3 version of their game was going to be subpar, they really owed it to their fans not to release it on that system.


Along with this, it should be noted that Beth has taken all responsibility for their lack of DLC on the PS3. They knew what tools they had to work with.
#32RampagingwalrusPosted 11/7/2012 1:26:02 PM
cynic79 posted...
If they had reason to believe that the PS3 version of their game was going to be subpar, they really owed it to their fans not to release it on that system.

Actually, I believe this falls into a 'damned if they do, damned if they do not" type scenario.
If they had not released Skyrim on PS3, people would have complained that they did not do it.
Likely more so than people are complaining about the lack of DLC.

It is better to have the game, on its own, without DLC.
Than to not have the game at all.
---
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.
#33LinkLuigiPosted 11/7/2012 1:28:23 PM
Rampagingwalrus posted...
cynic79 posted...
If they had reason to believe that the PS3 version of their game was going to be subpar, they really owed it to their fans not to release it on that system.

Actually, I believe this falls into a 'damned if they do, damned if they do not" type scenario.
If they had not released Skyrim on PS3, people would have complained that they did not do it.
Likely more so than people are complaining about the lack of DLC.

It is better to have the game, on its own, without DLC.
Than to not have the game at all.


Gotta disagree. At least, I'm sure their customers are quite upset to be getting a sub-par version of their game, whilst everyone else plays the real version. But what do I care, I have the game.
#34SuibomPosted 11/7/2012 1:57:44 PM
Option 4: jelly
---
"Remember those who are in prison, as though in prison with them, and those who are mistreated, since you also are in the body." Hebrews 13:3 ESV
#35cynic79Posted 11/7/2012 2:01:52 PM
Rampagingwalrus posted...
cynic79 posted...
If they had reason to believe that the PS3 version of their game was going to be subpar, they really owed it to their fans not to release it on that system.

Actually, I believe this falls into a 'damned if they do, damned if they do not" type scenario.
If they had not released Skyrim on PS3, people would have complained that they did not do it.
Likely more so than people are complaining about the lack of DLC.

It is better to have the game, on its own, without DLC.
Than to not have the game at all.


I think that was definitely part of the reasoning for releasing the game on the PS3 despite known problems with the way the system handles memory. That said, I feel bad for those who bought the game on the PS3 expecting the same experience that 360 customers would get.
#36XohmErunePosted 11/7/2012 2:12:07 PM
LinkLuigi posted...
Rampagingwalrus posted...
cynic79 posted...
If they had reason to believe that the PS3 version of their game was going to be subpar, they really owed it to their fans not to release it on that system.

Actually, I believe this falls into a 'damned if they do, damned if they do not" type scenario.
If they had not released Skyrim on PS3, people would have complained that they did not do it.
Likely more so than people are complaining about the lack of DLC.

It is better to have the game, on its own, without DLC.
Than to not have the game at all.


Gotta disagree. At least, I'm sure their customers are quite upset to be getting a sub-par version of their game, whilst everyone else plays the real version. But what do I care, I have the game.


Sub-par version? Did the PS3 version not have everything that the PC/360 version had? Did I miss that memo? Or do you just not know what you're talking about? Additional content is as it sounds. Add-i-tion-al.
---
You didn't think that you were the only one? He was the first.
#37MrcTOtheJPosted 11/7/2012 2:16:17 PM
RUNwhenCOPScome posted...
option 4; jelly?


I am jelly,

Anyhow it's not them being Dicks so much as needing to learn how to get things to work on the PS3.
---
Self Proclaimed Offical HoonDing, The Yokudan God of Make Way of the TES:V Skyrim Boards (360/PS3)
WOHHHHHHH!
#38TaigaWilliamPosted 11/7/2012 2:35:50 PM
From: Rampagingwalrus | #020
TaigaWilliam posted...
Just because it is more difficult doesn't mean you don't have a responsibility to your customers.

They have no responsibility to release DLC at all, let alone for any particular system, or all systems.
If they wanted to, they could develop and release entirely different DLCs for each system.

I knew somebody would make this stupid argument. Beth stated that Microsoft had a 30 day exclusivity contract on the DLC, meaning that they planned and promised the same DLC for the PS3. At that point, anyone who knows anything about business knows that they had a responsibility to their customers. Just because a company could do something stupid doesn't mean they should or would. That is what responsibility means.
---
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8zqdbtIPJ1r2zzpyo12_r1_250.gif
#39XohmErunePosted 11/7/2012 2:49:12 PM
TaigaWilliam posted...
From: Rampagingwalrus | #020
TaigaWilliam posted...
Just because it is more difficult doesn't mean you don't have a responsibility to your customers.

They have no responsibility to release DLC at all, let alone for any particular system, or all systems.
If they wanted to, they could develop and release entirely different DLCs for each system.

I knew somebody would make this stupid argument. Beth stated that Microsoft had a 30 day exclusivity contract on the DLC, meaning that they planned and promised the same DLC for the PS3. At that point, anyone who knows anything about business knows that they had a responsibility to their customers. Just because a company could do something stupid doesn't mean they should or would. That is what responsibility means.


No. It means that they planned to release it on another system, which they did. As PC users now have both Dawnguard and Hearthfire. Bethesda promised nothing, except that 360 users would be able to access the DLC 30 days before everyone else. It seems that "everyone else" meant the PC crowd. Your argument is now invalid.
---
You didn't think that you were the only one? He was the first.
#40turn_basedPosted 11/7/2012 2:52:29 PM
This poll, seriously, and others of it's ilk, are the reason I don't even bother clicking on over 90% of them. Silly or stupid or sloppy.
---
Redguards Rule!