Br3admax wrote:I'm not arguing, take that back..
But seriously, I'm only just discussing, it's a weakness of mine to never let anything go, Hissien, you should know that.
I thought you didn't care about not having the DLC?
Oh I don't, but for the sake of all that is holy, I really want to talk about to you guys. That's how much I care...... Seriously though, I want to talk about Dawnguard with the people here, and not being able to as much is terrible.
Edit:Frosty, why did you bring that back up, that argument was squashed, and I would not rather have it again..
Justice knight wrote:Oh and listen to Br3ad he speaks wisdom.
All i said was they appreciated the defense, chill..... I dont really care who's fault it is. Blaming beth or defending them doesnt help the issue. I am surprised the thread hasnt been locked yet :T.
Frosty is a die hard Bethesda fan, he says that mods can't be better than dlc, most of the time, that Bethesda always tries "their best, and that's what matters", and that it must be a Sony problem. He loves Bethesda, and he will always defend them, you probably can not blame him for that either.
Justice knight wrote:Oh and listen to Br3ad he speaks wisdom.
Still no DLC for PS3? I'm turning my back on Bethesda. They should not expect any money from me, I paid a lot for TES games and now I'm ... I'm ... I can't find the right word for it.
My opinion will probably change from "they can't do it" to "they don't want to do it". One fan less for them, it's their fault.
I don't think we can go at this thing logically from the pure black & white standpoint, where one side is completely right and the the other is completely wrong. I'm not even sure if the terms "blame" and "fault" can be used correctly here. I've come to see this as an unfortunate situation arising from unintended consequences born of both sides.
On the one hand, technical and engineering decisions made by Sony concerning the PS3's RAM have left that console with unique requirements and limitations which I'm sure weren't part of the original design brief. I'm not so sure about the PS3 being "difficult to code for", but I'll give that aspect of the argument the benefit of the doubt for now.
On the other hand, no matter how much of a Bethesda fanboy one may be, it must be admitted that BGS has a history of producing beautiful but sloppy products which don't do the hardware any favours.
While the analogy of a "perfect storm" might be overblown, I think that is essentially the situation here, where dark linings from both sides have combined to create a set of unfavourable circumstances that few could have foreseen, and fewer still seem able to mitigate. Neither Sony nor BGS intended to set out on such a problematic course, but because of the combination of deficiencies from both sides, those of us caught in the middle are getting rained on.
He is 14, I am 17(and got them fighting Irish genes and Scottish(Braveheart) and African genes ). And we would never fight. We like to disagree, but that is really just away to keep this thread alive. And I'm a spellsword, yo!
Justice knight wrote:Oh and listen to Br3ad he speaks wisdom.
I'd like to add to the conversation that I'm of the opinion that Dawnguard probably doesn't perform that much worse than the DLC for Bethesdas previous games. My personal theory, reading between the lines, is that Sony has gotten tired of getting complaints about Bethesdas lax standards. I think Sony got tired of giving Bethesda games a pass when they wouldn't have for any other developer. There ARE performance standards games are supposed to meet before being released, and Bethesda has kind of ignored them (there's no way FONV meets them, or skyrim at release for that matter.) it was probably a combination of being tired of Beth laughing at the standards, and being a little ticked about the Xbox exclusivity period.
Note that I don't blame Sony if this is the case, I just wish we weren't caught in the middle.
It's okay to disagree with me, you're entitled to your opinion. No matter how wrong you are.