Bethesda “Not Positive” That Dawnguard Will Ever Make it to PS3

The Skyrim DLC schedule will soon see its second release, in the shape of Hearthfire, on the Xbox 360. That expansion is expected on the PC around a month later, as was the case with the first DLC expansion: Dawnguard. But the prospect of ever seeing any Skyrim DLC on a PlayStation 3 is looking uncertain.

A locked thread has gone up on Bethesda’s forums to address the ongoing absence of Dawnguard on the PlayStation 3:

– ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW –

The PS3 is a powerful system, and we’re working hard to deliver the content you guys want. Dawnguard is obviously not the only DLC we’ve been working on either, so the issues of adding content get even more complicated. This is not a problem we’re positive we can solve, but we are working together with Sony to try to bring you this content.

So it seems like there’s some kind of problem with expanding content on the PS3 – something that other developers seem to have found a way to make work. It’s well known that the PS3’s architecture is more complicated than most developers would prefer but we’re now almost six years into its life and Bethesda has put out multiple titles on the console. You’d think they’d know it inside out by now.

It would be quite interesting to know what the actual problem is, we’re sure there will be plenty of assumptions made in the coming days.

Source: Bethesda forums

– PAGE CONTINUES BELOW –

75 Comments

  1. If it ever does come to PS3 it best be free now!

    Let’s hope dishonoured is not a lag fest but it’s bethesda so won’t be shocked if it is. Worst developers on PS3. I still love fallout 3 though

    • Why should it be free? Because it has been delayed. You should pay the same as everyone else.

      • Considering that skyrim was unplayable for a lot of people for the first few months after release – giving people a freebie as an act of good will would not be a bad way for Bethesda to apologise.

        I was lucky that I played the game relatively trouble free, a lot of people couldn’t, to who’s to say that dawnguard is guaranteed to give me grief? If it works, then great, if it doesn’t then I haven’t lost anything – its sat there on bethesdas server right now – they’re not going to make any money out of it there, so why not let people have the chance?

        Not releasing it = pissed off ps3 owners.
        Releasing it and it not working = pissed off ps3 owners.
        Releasing for free = pissed off 360 owners.

        Your choice Bethesda, just remember how much flack you got on forums – you’ve still got a lot of sucking up to.

        Release the DLC for free, and if it runs ok for some people ask that they donate to a charity…

      • I hate this “you owe me something for nothing” attitude. Bethesda dont owe you anything and sure as shit will never realease it for free. They are already contemplating not realeasing it because its not financially viable. Why would they release it for free and not make anything out of it?

        “its sat there on bethesdas server right now – they’re not going to make any money out of it there, so why not let people have the chance?”

        It may well be sat there but you think it costs buttons to release it onto the PS store? And somehow I doubt it would get anywhere near QA testing. Its not just Bethesdas reputation at stake. Its Sony’s too for allowing it to be published

      • But i want to get DG in a very buggy state then complain about it for being in a buggy state then say that they should have delayed it before doing the same with the next DLC. /sarcasm.

        It’s not like Skyrim won’t tide you over untill Bethesda can get the thing to work as there is 100s of hours(depending on what quests you do and if you like to explore) worth of content. And i’ve heard DG is not that great. I do hope they won’t give up as it does add some improvements to the game such as Vampires being better and werewolves actually being able to survive after level 30. But i suspect they will implent some of the features via a patch as a way of saying sorry. Unless it’s those features that are causing the problems.

        As many have said, if Bethesda allowed it to be released in the current bug filled state that it is in, we would complain about it and their reputation(they are already known as the developer of the most buggiest games of the year) will take a hit. As well as Sony due to them actually allowing an unplayable add-on to be released which could put people off from using any of their products again. That and it probably costs 10Grand+ just to get it onto the store. But i think we will get Hearthfire due to it not being that complex unless they are actually having trouble with implenting DLC into the PS3 version of Skyrim. In which case, oh well, i’ll wait for the GOTY edition as it’s probably going to be easier for them to release it all on the same disc to avoid any issues.

    • Aye, doesn’t fill you with confidence.

      Although the developers Arcane Studios don’t share that poor track record, in fact their only work which may have appeared on PS3 to do date is design work in Bioshock2 so who knows how it will turn out.

      • The problem is the game engine not the developers and Dishono[u]red isn’t using the Fallout/Oblivion engine so should be fine.

    • Dishonored is a completely different team using a different engine.

  2. You would’ve thought Bethesda would have tried to find this problem BEFORE they green-lighted Skyrim. Disgraceful.

  3. Are Team Ico working on it?

  4. Looking at their earlier framerate problems & where they struggled with larger save files exisiting in the memory I would have thought they’re struggling to have the world exist in the PS3’s 256+256 RAM configuration because of the way it’s been written/ported to the PS3, might not be this though it might be they’ve not offloaded work to the Cell efficiently to be able to free up the PS3’s more limited components.

    Who knows I suppose, I’m not even sure they know, but this is an extreme example of why the PS4 would be better off moving closer towards a traditional PC architecture.

    • I’d say that’s exactly it. They haven’t offloaded to the Cell, like they’re supposed to, and it’s cost them the use of the memory which in turn slows down the game because the size of the world/variables are bigger than the ram, so more has to be loaded from the hdd. I think, anyway.
      The point is moot, though, because every other developer can manage the challenge. Rockstar, Avalanche (Just cause), Pandemic, Rocksteady have all managed to create these open world games with no massive problems.
      Furthermore, games like Bioshock that have big saves due to the loot variables also have zero problem with the PS3…the problem lies solely with Bethesda.

    • Pretty sure it’ll be the memory architecture they’re still struggling with. Expanding the world for the DLC is almost certainly just proving too hard to fit in the RAM. As someone who’s worked on systems with split memory architectures the devs have my sympathies.

      I understand why Sony split the RAM the way they did but they got their priorities wrong and created a far less flexible system as a result. Still an extremely capable system, just less flexible.

      • They should have just put in an extra 256MB for the CPU instead of integrating PS2 hardware.

        I would have paid an extra £30 quid for that at launch.

  5. This is shoddy and pretty damn disgraceful really. To even think of blaming on the PS3 different architecture is bollocks. If they can make a game, they can product DLC, so it can’t be that.

    Sounds like some back handers going on somewhere. Or none with Sony.

    • The DLC isn’t standalone is it? If so it needs Skyrim to be loaded. Sorry if I’m wrong.

      I guess they’ve hit what they perceive as the limits of the console and getting around it might not be financially viable (read: they can’t be arsed!). :-)

      • Yeah, a very complicated huge world that’s being added to & seeing as that world only just existed on PS3 after some pretty lengthy patching up, it’s not hard to understand that plugging into it isn’t going smoothly and when things don’t go smoothly in IT it’s just a time-sink that costs & costs & costs, and all that time they know they can work on the further DLC for PC/X360 which they know will work and they can cream money off.

      • This alone, right here, should show Sony why they mustn’t fall into this trap again. It’s not about the devs being any good (or not). It’s about how many titles they ship and if they can (or cannot) be bothered to continue coding for a particular platform.

        Bloody idiots!

      • you have it there cc, its not financially viable to carry on trying so they gave up.

        Disgraceful IMO.

  6. Pretty abysmal stuff when you think about what runs on the PS3 and the scale of some of the games. I guess they can see what they have to do and every dev there is trying to avoid the short straw of coding/fixing the damn thing.

    Once again, Sony’s arrogant statement of having a console which challenged programmers was disgraceful at best. Build a system which doesn’t fight against the devs. The creation of the game itself will challenge them on every level. Hopefully this sort of attitude (and problem) can be put to rest when the PS4 arrives.

    • I disagree. The architecture is commonly thought of hard to program. It is not. It is just different from the norm.

      As far as I remember the PS3 originally was not going to include a GPU but implement a dual Cell architecture until the devs through their arms in the air.

      Developers are lazy. Especially those that game from PC game development.

      • I don’t think you could be more wrong. I’ve worked in IT all of my post-graduation life. I’ve worked with developers every day of that period. A couple of those developers are now moving onto games development and how brutal it is (in comparison to normal software development) has shocked them. The optimisation, the competitive nature, the very fact that your game is being measured (in every way) against everything else out there and in the media spotlight – as oppose to a database returning the results a little slow and the client simply not knowing about it.

        Sony built custom hardware and it’s difficult to program for. Not impossible but it forces good development to take a different approach. Different approaches have to be learnt and this is where it really lets things down. Different processing, different rendering, different memory handling. You code for the PS3 and that code is useless everywhere else. There’s no real return on the investment into the architecture outside of your own releases on the same platform.

        Developers are not lazy. Good developers are conscientious as hell. Good game developers are truly astounding.

        Don’t mistake lazy for efficient. It’s all about time:money.

      • Yeah you have some good points. But I have worked with software most of my life. Started with assembly now just plain old .Net.

        Historically consoles have always been built on custom architectures. When devs are developing at the level they need for games they are already knee deep in low level stuff. My argument is that once you are at that level a hardware architectural change can’t make it “more” complex”. Especially when both PS3 and 360 actually use the same CPU instruction set. All that is different are optimisation techniques (i.e. don’t use the GPU for anti-aliasing on the PS3 and avoid the cash bottle-neck on the 360).

    • I completely agree with this. I have no idea what kind of problems Bethesda are having with this and I wonder if this is something they can fix with just a GOTY version but I’m sure that would come with it’s own problem, maybe fucking with peoples game saves or not even allowing them to carry over.

      And yes Sony are to blame as well, a lot of people are over looking this, Sony fucked up when they made such a pointlessly hard to program machine.

  7. Caused by developing for the 360 and then doing a shoddy port to the PC and PS3. The PC had the advantage of a huge modding community essentially fixing it for them.

    Other than them actually building a PS3 version of the engine from the ground up, as they promised they were doing, it will be perpetually broken. Still think they would have saved a great deal of face with some sort of swap out for PS3 players for an alternative platform.

  8. Same old Same old from Bethesda, they just do not give a damn about doing the job right when it comes to the PS3. Sadly they are not alone in that train of thought. I jumped ship from 360 to PS3 completely in 2008 and really enjoyed a good run on some amazing titles largly from First Party Studios, the likes of Naughty Dog for example who took the time to actually use the PS3 hardware properly and well you have seen the results that just get better with every game. For every great game was a crappy unsupported DLC exclusive riddled failure. This is what led me in 2011 to just abandon them, that topped with the SCEE incompetence and there inability to release something and follow it through. (See MOVE, Vita, et al).

    I was one of the poor souls that trade to complete Fallout 3 (GOTY Edition) on PS3 which literally crashed 189 times when attempting to complete the extra DLC. No attempt was made to fix it. This bug then carried over into New Vegas and then Skyrim again they didn’t seem that bothered on a fix. The likes of Trine 2 can fail QA by Sony but yet broken crap like the latter titles can really boggles my mind.

    I don’t care for fanboyism, I’m not bothered which does what best all I care about is getting the best experiance for me which boils down to buying 90% of my games for 360 and the 10% remaining being the exclusives on the PS3.

    • Whatever floats your boat m8. I tend to buy PC versions of stuff that is bugged on the PS3, ME3, Skyrim, etc. Usually way superior to the console versions and cheaper to boot.

      • Probably but consoles are my home, no desire to game on a PC other then SW:TOR on my lappy.

        I just think it is a massive massive uber joke that 3 or 4 studios can produce games that quite frankly look beyond this generation and yet the rest can barely make a passible port. :(

        Can’t believe Sony hasn’t done something about by now, its not like Microsoft stay quiet when it comes to the subject of quality control especially against other platforms.

  9. losing faith in them.

  10. This is probably a good thing, it would have ran like crap anyway!

    • if I could I would of given you a thumbs up ;)

      • I’m taking that and keeping it for later ;)

        This has absolutely nothing to do with me experiencing all sorts of game-breaking problems with the Fallout 3 DLC that I played recently, and that turned out to be one of my most unenjoyable gaming experiences ever. Nothing at all….Honest.

Comments are now closed for this post.