REMAINSILLY
Member
It's the only console I own.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Bethesda working with Sony to get Dawnguard to run on PS3.
- Thread starter Starsunder
- Start date
It's the only console I own.
timetokill
Banned
Bethesda should have just not made a Playstation version until Sony came up with a sensible memory architecture.
Then again, I guess there are enough suckers that it was worth the cost to just release the damn thing on PS3, as crappy as it was.
Then again, I guess there are enough suckers that it was worth the cost to just release the damn thing on PS3, as crappy as it was.
Well, they are taking responsibility by working closely with Sony...
It's sensible enough for everyone else, including the team they got to port Oblivion
and every single PC dev.
Poohblaster
Member
I know Metacritic scores are looked down upon, but the gaming press really let down consumers for the Skyrim release on PS3.
PC 94%
PS3 92%
Xbox 360 96%
Anyone looking to purchase Skyrim on the PS3 wouldn't see any red flags based on most reviews.
As far as optimizing Skyrim for the PS3 a lot of you are blaming Gamebryo. Skyrim doesn't even run on the Gamebryo engine. It runs on an in house engine developed by Bethesda. Besthesda relies heavily on lots of fast memory and that works fine for the 360 and PC.
My point is take your rage out on the press for not warning you about the problems with the PS3.
PC 94%
PS3 92%
Xbox 360 96%
Anyone looking to purchase Skyrim on the PS3 wouldn't see any red flags based on most reviews.
As far as optimizing Skyrim for the PS3 a lot of you are blaming Gamebryo. Skyrim doesn't even run on the Gamebryo engine. It runs on an in house engine developed by Bethesda. Besthesda relies heavily on lots of fast memory and that works fine for the 360 and PC.
My point is take your rage out on the press for not warning you about the problems with the PS3.
AgentOtaku
Member
fucking wow
like
...just
......
like
...just
......
wonderdung
Member
Half this thread is leftover Skyrim rage and not about the DLC at all. Lots of "they should have just not released it or delayed it." That's exactly what they're doing with the DLC it sounds like.
Although coming out and saying "we're not sure if we can solve this problem" with some hand-wavy explanation of the problem is really odd. As a dev I'm embarrassed for them. I imagine there are not a lot of happy feelings there at the moment, especially as they're faced with the possibility of having to scrap a few million in DLC sales.
Although coming out and saying "we're not sure if we can solve this problem" with some hand-wavy explanation of the problem is really odd. As a dev I'm embarrassed for them. I imagine there are not a lot of happy feelings there at the moment, especially as they're faced with the possibility of having to scrap a few million in DLC sales.
SirIgbyCeaser
Banned
It's not idiotic, its actually more similar to PC than the 360's. The XDR ram is faster than the 360's and the GDDR3 is equally as fast.
Also, built in harddrive on all hardware. They optimized the game to work on Arcade 360 systems but not the ps3. It's a joke on the developer not the hardware.
Mysterious Stranger
Member
I don't understand how it can run skyrim and not the DLC.
Most of them didn't even play the PS3 version. Bethesda only provided 360 code for reviews I believe. I remember reading some PC sites saying they had to play on 360.
SolidSnakex
Member
Josh Sawyer from Obsidian said that DLC would make things much worse. Which is even more amusing when you take this into account
https://twitter.com/#!/DCDeacon/status/144223529892712449
https://twitter.com/dcdeacon/status/144241729577553920
GoofsterStud
Member
Just play Kingdom of Amalur DLC.
I enjoyed Teeth of Naru much more. Though I preferred the base game for Skyrim.
Any good Dragon Dogma DLC coming?
I enjoyed Teeth of Naru much more. Though I preferred the base game for Skyrim.
Any good Dragon Dogma DLC coming?
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Same thing happened last gen. Publishers only gave out PS2 builds to the press and the Xbox and GameCube reviews were just a copy/paste. But PS only mags have zero excuse for their scores.
GillianSeed79
Member
Weren't people complaining that they should have delayed the PS3 version of Skyrim instead of releasing a broken product? It sounds like they are delaying Dawnguard because it would be broken on the PS3.
That said, you guys aren't missing that much. I honestly didn't enjoy Dawnguard that much (played on PC) I know people will argue it fits into the ES lore, but the vampire thing just felt so out of place in the tone set by Skyrim. Maybe it's because I sided with the Dawnguard, but I honestly found it boring and the end of the questline is completely anticlimactic. The Soul Carin is also awful and reminded me why I hated the Oblivion gates in Oblivion.
That said, you guys aren't missing that much. I honestly didn't enjoy Dawnguard that much (played on PC) I know people will argue it fits into the ES lore, but the vampire thing just felt so out of place in the tone set by Skyrim. Maybe it's because I sided with the Dawnguard, but I honestly found it boring and the end of the questline is completely anticlimactic. The Soul Carin is also awful and reminded me why I hated the Oblivion gates in Oblivion.
D
Deleted member 102362
Unconfirmed Member
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
It wasn't idiotic it was like the PC at the time. Also Nvidia chips at time could access main memory unless it was through the cpu, until the geforce 9 series chipset.
Ridiculous, but it has issues on my vastly more powerful PC too.
I like to play it on the TV, which is also connected to my graphics card. Problem is the TV only supports 60hz, and there's some kind of bug wherein things get choppy when you walk up to walls, etc., at 60hz. I therefore had to download a mod to run the game in a borderless window. I'm no technical wizard and by the time I'm done sorting out their mess I have lost any enthusiasm to play.
Also had major crashing issues with Fallout 3 and New Vegas (I LOVED both BTW). It's just a tremendous pain in the ass to play any game Bethesda puts out, which is a great shame as I don't have this problem with other games.
So yeah, you have my sympathy PS3 owners if they can't even get the expansion running properly! I have a PS3 and it's always third choice for third party game purchases, but this really takes the biscuit.
I like to play it on the TV, which is also connected to my graphics card. Problem is the TV only supports 60hz, and there's some kind of bug wherein things get choppy when you walk up to walls, etc., at 60hz. I therefore had to download a mod to run the game in a borderless window. I'm no technical wizard and by the time I'm done sorting out their mess I have lost any enthusiasm to play.
Also had major crashing issues with Fallout 3 and New Vegas (I LOVED both BTW). It's just a tremendous pain in the ass to play any game Bethesda puts out, which is a great shame as I don't have this problem with other games.
So yeah, you have my sympathy PS3 owners if they can't even get the expansion running properly! I have a PS3 and it's always third choice for third party game purchases, but this really takes the biscuit.
CecilRousso
Member
Yikes. Sucks for the PS3 owners. Bought the PC version myself, so I´m good and enjoying the game, but it´s a shame the other versions have problem. At least they´re being honest about it for Dawnguard.
How embarrassing for Bethesda.
PS3 has a HDD as standard and the RAM situation is not hugely different to 360. I'm sure if they designed their PS3 engine around the strengths of the hardware they could get their games running very nicely indeed. My uninformed speculation is that they just try to do things the same way they do them on 360.
PS3 has a HDD as standard and the RAM situation is not hugely different to 360. I'm sure if they designed their PS3 engine around the strengths of the hardware they could get their games running very nicely indeed. My uninformed speculation is that they just try to do things the same way they do them on 360.
Sony and it's internal QA had to have known about the technical issues prior to release, but decided to go forward with it to avoid the embarrassment of having it not release. Yes it's bad on Bethesda, and I had plenty of annoyances with the pc version at launch, but Sony would be the one's to make that decision. I'm sure those meetings weren't fun.
Brad Grenz
Member
Developers have managed to work in segmented memory systems literally for decades. There is no one to blame but Bethesda. Their save system is just bad. Saves can literally grow to be any size and must also fit in memory and there is no graceful way for the engine to fail. That is poor software design, not a hardware problem.
Mr_Appleby
Member
Well, yes and no. You don't have it all in memory at the one time, AFAIK they have the world divided into cells, and again AFAIK each cell stores it's contents as a diff from the world start state. So these files are not really that large, because only items you touch go into the diff. The diff files are then read only when a cell is being streamed in to memory. So if you go throw plates all over Whiterun then quicktravel to Windhelm, the memory used for whiterun is written back to disk and released for other stuff.
and the graphics have very little to do with it. that stuff is on disc, the diff file is only going to have an entry like "CHEESE:X,Y,Z"
You're confusing QA with certification. Certification is mostly concerned with superficial things like copyright warnings etc, it's not a detailed QA process.
endlessflood
Member
I'm guessing that Sony refuses to let it pass QA/certification. Hence the whole "working with Sony" line.
pslayer666
Member
They do, but the Bethesda guys are working hard right now on the BRAND NEW ENGINE for their new game, so they had to ask Sony.....
as brand new as the Skyrim engine was
Castor Krieg
Banned
That's what you get when using Gamebryo for every game this generation. PoS engine makes PoS games.
(I shouldn't have to say it, but the first paragraph is me being somewhat facetious)
I know people want to say this is all on Bethesda, but hasn't Skyrim's failure on the PS3 proved just how ineffectual and unnecessary Sony's certification process is. It also proves how poorly designed the PS3 was. Sony is, at least in part, to blame here. Doesn't practically every open-world game have issues on the PS3?
Or, y'know, wasn't this supposed to be an ultra-rare thing that didn't happen all that much? Like, didn't Bethesda have some 1% number for it or something? So, maybe the "boo, Bethesda is terrible and should never have released skyrim" remarks are a bit over the top?
My reaction--assuming I didn't misremember that number--is that nobody came up against the problem, it's a rare problem, and it's not something to start boycotting Bethesda over. I've heard "OH THEY KNEW IT WAS A PROBLEM," but, well, did they? I'd like to understand where this vitriol is coming from.
Besides, what rational person buys a Bethesda game on a console?
Er, uh... it kind of is.
The 360 uses a unified memory pool (IIRC it also has EDRAM), which means that the OS and the game shares RAM. If I remember right, the 360's OS is also lighter than the PS3's to begin with, which means that if the 360 takes up, say, 60MB for its OS, then it's got around 400+ MB of RAM for the game to use. The PS3, on the other hand, has a split memory pool, so if the OS takes up, say, 80 MB (like I said, I remember hearing that the PS3's OS is heavier than the 360's), well... the game's limited to 256 MB RAM for the video, and 176 for the game. Now, maybe the game doesn't need 256 for video, and needs more than 176 for the game. Can't really do anything about that on the PS3. With the 360, it just shifts stuff around, because all that's shared.
It's one of the reasons the 360's the better machine than the PS3 (GPU would be another area where the PS3 lags), despite the PS3 having a more powerful processor. RAM is kinda important, and Sony really screwed up.
That's my understanding. Could be totally off-base.
I know people want to say this is all on Bethesda, but hasn't Skyrim's failure on the PS3 proved just how ineffectual and unnecessary Sony's certification process is. It also proves how poorly designed the PS3 was. Sony is, at least in part, to blame here. Doesn't practically every open-world game have issues on the PS3?
Or, y'know, wasn't this supposed to be an ultra-rare thing that didn't happen all that much? Like, didn't Bethesda have some 1% number for it or something? So, maybe the "boo, Bethesda is terrible and should never have released skyrim" remarks are a bit over the top?
My reaction--assuming I didn't misremember that number--is that nobody came up against the problem, it's a rare problem, and it's not something to start boycotting Bethesda over. I've heard "OH THEY KNEW IT WAS A PROBLEM," but, well, did they? I'd like to understand where this vitriol is coming from.
Besides, what rational person buys a Bethesda game on a console?
Er, uh... it kind of is.
The 360 uses a unified memory pool (IIRC it also has EDRAM), which means that the OS and the game shares RAM. If I remember right, the 360's OS is also lighter than the PS3's to begin with, which means that if the 360 takes up, say, 60MB for its OS, then it's got around 400+ MB of RAM for the game to use. The PS3, on the other hand, has a split memory pool, so if the OS takes up, say, 80 MB (like I said, I remember hearing that the PS3's OS is heavier than the 360's), well... the game's limited to 256 MB RAM for the video, and 176 for the game. Now, maybe the game doesn't need 256 for video, and needs more than 176 for the game. Can't really do anything about that on the PS3. With the 360, it just shifts stuff around, because all that's shared.
It's one of the reasons the 360's the better machine than the PS3 (GPU would be another area where the PS3 lags), despite the PS3 having a more powerful processor. RAM is kinda important, and Sony really screwed up.
That's my understanding. Could be totally off-base.
They do, but they can flag the game for all kinds of shit, but if the 3rd party has a good relationship with them, they can usually sweet talk them into letting it go out with a bunch of shit. Having done QA for a publisher I can tell you there were times we got a fail report back and instead of just fixing the issues our people would get in touch with theirs and we'd eventually get a conditional approval.
Truespeed
Member
Your revelation that the "OS and the game shares RAM" was all we needed to know.
demigod
Member
Didn't the patch fixed the problem though? How can it be broke again if they figured out how to patch it previously?
This is more like Bethesda asking Sony for help in resources, aka Benjamins.
BakedPigeon
Banned
It is as simple as this.
Bethesda had to of known their issues with the PS3 version of the game throughout its entire development.
They should have either cancelled it for PS3 or delayed the PS3 version until they had everything working smoothly.
It's obvious that the PS3 was not playing well with the way Bethesda created the Skyrim engine to work and I am sure the PS3 is not easy to program for but you cannot blame this colossal fuck up on the PS3. Bethesda should have never released a game in that condition and anyone who says otherwise and defends Bethesda is short sighted.
Bethesda had to of known their issues with the PS3 version of the game throughout its entire development.
They should have either cancelled it for PS3 or delayed the PS3 version until they had everything working smoothly.
It's obvious that the PS3 was not playing well with the way Bethesda created the Skyrim engine to work and I am sure the PS3 is not easy to program for but you cannot blame this colossal fuck up on the PS3. Bethesda should have never released a game in that condition and anyone who says otherwise and defends Bethesda is short sighted.
Yes this is all fine, but the 360 also needs to use some RAM for video so if you subtract that then the numbers we are comparing are not massively different. Also there are some Good Reasons relating to bandwidth for having a split memory pool. Hardware design is always a case of balancing tradeoffs, there is no right way and wrong way. What matters is that the software is designed in a way that is appropriate for the hardware.
The fact remains that PS3 has a HDD as standard and Bethesda could surely be exploiting that to reduce their RAM requirements. They've had plenty of attempts at getting this right and it was obvious years ago that their PS3 engine was, shall we say, sub-optimal.
To be fair, Catherine was great with Gamebryo engine.
90TilInfinity
Member
Look at the number of Playstation exclusive magazines though. I've no interest in Skyrim or Bethesda developed games but this is a pretty blatant case of those magazines catering to publishers and not their readers. Totally unfair. Well done to the UK Playstation Magazine who actually mentioned in their 7/10 review:
Total Playstation (9), PSM3 (9.5), Playstation Universe (9.5), The Official US Playstation Magazine (10) etc for sure have their share of Playstation readers and just fed them the hype they'd been hearing for months previous.
The_Hitcher89
Member
I sure as hell won't be buying any Bethesda games new unless the game has been proven to run competently after a few weeks in the stores.
can you watch longplayes that last 30-50 hours..? (just kidding)...
I´m a sad person.-. because I loved Skyrim.. so much that it was my third Platinum Throphy on my PS3.. I normally do not go for something like that, but I loved Skyrim.. so it is sad for me that I cannot play Dawnguard.. I could cope with the Vanilla Skyrim, so I would probably could cope with Dawnguard, even if the animations would loook like I´m turning pages in a book..
Canis lupus
Member
Should never have released the game on PS3. Me and my bro platinummed the game, clocked in over 100hours, savefile was like 17MB big. Damn, every combat was like a dia show, framerate went below 0. Not to mention how long it took to load and save.
This is one game I regret buying. F:NV was pushing it but I learned my lessons.
This is one game I regret buying. F:NV was pushing it but I learned my lessons.
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
What a truly terribly made game.
And lol at people saying they shouldnt have released the game on PS3. As if the PS3 couldnt run it conceptually. Just dont do dumb shit like the game loading every placed melon back at home in its exact spot. Streamline the game's stupid shit, dont just hurl it all out there and hope for the best.
And lol at people saying they shouldnt have released the game on PS3. As if the PS3 couldnt run it conceptually. Just dont do dumb shit like the game loading every placed melon back at home in its exact spot. Streamline the game's stupid shit, dont just hurl it all out there and hope for the best.
I don't think it's all a ps3 hardware fault here. This is happening when you started to developing on 360 than you port into the ps3... it's very simple. I mean, from what I have understood is not even that simple ports the edram job in a split RAM of a normal pc, it's just thankfully to the vastly more powerful hardware of the pc if the things are that simple, correct me if I'm wrong. Just image the poor ps3 hardware. Bethesda needs to blame itself. A lot of developers has learned this lesson, I don't understand why they have prefered to complicate its life in this way...
Similar threads
- Locked