Skyrim DLC may finally be coming to PS3.
Skyrim's relationship with the PS3 has been tumultuous. Soon after the popular open world RPG's launch on the console, complaints of a "save glitch" arose, where Skyrim save files ballooned in size as more and more hours were logged onto a game, causing lag to the point that the game became unplayable. The only temporary fix for PS3-Skyrim players was to restart their console every time the lag became too bad.
The permanent solution didn't come until Patch 1.5, which dropped half a year after Skyrim's release.
A few months later, Bethesda released Skyrim's first DLC, Dawnguard, which first hit Xbox 360 and PC two months after. Bethesda revealed that the DLC wouldn't be landing on PS3 in the near future, possibly ever, because of the issues that the developer had with the platform.
When Hearthfire, Skyrim's homebuilding DLC, released in September, PS3 players found that they were to be spurned again.
Now, with Dragonborn, Skyrim's third DLC, landing in a month, Bethesda's announced hopeful news for Skyrim on PS3. "We’re also close on new Skyrim content for PS3 and PC," stated Bethesda on its official Twitter feed.
Unfortunately, that's all the developer was willing to reveal. It's said nothing of what DLC will be made available on PS3 and when. Here's to hoping that the developer will be able to make at least Dragonborn, if not Dawnguard and Hearthfire, available to the PS3.
For me the only acceptable answer I really take for not buying PC for a game like this is if your computer won't run it but you have a console that will.
bethesda cant code for the ps3, whats surprising is people will still buy a game for that system that uses a bethesda engine.
For me the only acceptable answer I really take for not buying PC for a game like this is if your computer won't run it but you have a console that will.
There's another very valid reason to buy console: if you have local friends that have consoles. If I buy a console game, I can lend it to a friend and they can play it while I continue to play my other games.
If I buy a PC game, and specifically Skyrim which is tied to Steam, I have to give my friend access to my Steam account (which I'm willing to do) and that leaves me unable to play my other games while said friend is playing Skyrim.
Another one is lack of local splitscreen support in a title like Borderlands. On consoles playing with a friend in the same room requires no more effort than selecting a menu option. On PC if I want to play Borderlands with a friend on the same computer I need to basically juryrig the solution so that I emulate input on a second controller and run two instances of the game simultaneously.
That or buy two copies of the game and have two gaming computers linked through LAN.
Seems like the only one complaining about Skyrim DLC on the PS3 is a few obscure web sites.
Each system has its pros and cons. However, the PS3 is a beast to code for to start with, let alone develop a massive open-world multiplatform title like Skyrim. The memory architecture is less flexible than the 360, as well. If it was a ground-up PS3 project it would be better able to play to the PS3's strengths, without having to worry about a consistent gameplay experience. I doubt Skyrim will ever run quite as smoothly on PS3 as it does on 360, but they don't want a botched hastily launched DLC that brings back memories of the large save performance issues.
Oh also even after all the latest updates, the PS3 still uses ~50MB RAM for the OS, 360 is still 32MB as always. Although 50MB is still a massive improvement over launch 120MB and later 96MB. They did a pretty good job considering they don't have a MS-sized pool of OS developers to tap. I'm hoping both the next gen consoles use at least 4GB of memory. Consoles don't have all the overhead of a full-blown OS running all sorts of background tasks (guilty as charged) but they still need to prepare themselves for increasingly large and detailed worlds. Elder Scrolls VI, anyone?
As for your proof? The reason they don't port it to OS X is because it wouldn't be worth the time and effort to port and support the game for an OS with such a small gaming audience. Especially since any serious gamer with a Mac (assuming they have decent graphics) should be using Bootcamp anyway.
That isn't a valid reason why Skyrim is single player only.
You're steam excuse is bull too. Since Skyrim is single player only, only one player could be playing it at one time. Unless you admit to illegally copying it.
No one on PC cares about splitscreen support.
Umm....i don't know if you think you know what you are making an analogy of, but it definitely isn't the same. What you're speaking of is physical medium to digital download. Using that same example, it would be as to saying someone trading off a PC physical disc, to downloading a game off PS3 and not being able to trade it.
At least if you bring up a difference, make it a valid one.
yea, ps3 is a pain to code for, ill give you that.
take a look at most other multi platform game, how many of them still have problems with the ps3?
brethesda basically refused to learn how to code for it right this generation.
rather than give players broken as hell dlc, they are spending their time to fix the game.
so instead of takeing their money and giveing them bug filled crap, they are redoing much of the code for skyrim ps3.
over all i say this is good
but really, they should have got it working at launch, like i said above, everyone else figured out how to code ps3.
This is exactly why i dont buy games when they are released and wait till some form of GOTY edition. No worth to waste your free time wiht something that frustrates you.