You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
would have to say beth. other instances of shady practices have occured. like how in the manual for SF x Tekn it says you can local tag and go online for xbox and ps3, but you cant do it on xbox. they said its because of the differences between xboxlive and psn, but you can do that exact thing on mortal kombat, the developers were lying to our faces. i have both ps3 and xbox and i can understand exclusivity to a point like maybe skins but not features or major content.
I still seek a good explanation of how the main Skyrim game can be released on the PS3, but the DLC's can't . Don't they run on the same engine ?
Because they have to spend time/money to convert the programs to work on the PS3 hardware. The return might not be worth the investment, which is why it has not happened.
This^ and They're probably sitting in the office like: "Dude why bother? Anyone with even slight skills can hack the PSN again and steal all thier money and DLC anyway. Watch, I'll do it right now so they can B**** about it to someone else." .... *PSN Crashes* ...." See, took me five seconds." Serioulsy sell your PS3 as soon as you can thier Firewalls still suck more than a poor woman in a tijuana stable.
"Lighthouses are more usefull than churches" - Benjamin Franklin-
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.