I'm about 8 hours in but it's really putting me off knowing that at a certain point, probably when I'm really enjoying it, it's going to turn to shit. I just can't stop playing though. Really sucks that this'll be addressed in January at the earliest (unless the patch next week does something.)
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Digital Foundry VS Bethesda: PS3 Skyrim is still shit
- Thread starter AgentOtaku
- Start date
I'm about 8 hours in but it's really putting me off knowing that at a certain point, probably when I'm really enjoying it, it's going to turn to shit. I just can't stop playing though. Really sucks that this'll be addressed in January at the earliest (unless the patch next week does something.)
My file has 85 hours, about 10mb save, and I've noticed a huge improvement post-patch. Pre-patch, it had gotten to the point that it was like that video almost all the time. After the patch, I've played another 10 hours or so and I've only had it drop like that once (and that was at the end of a ~6 hour play session).
It's definitely a lot better (though it can still get pretty bad, especially in Markarth), and I can actually play the damn game now, but it's still not fixed, and it's still unacceptable. I've also gotten a LOT more freezing since the patch. Like, at least once every time I play for a couple hours or more. I actually just lost 40 minutes of progress because of a freeze and had to take a break because I got pissed.
It's definitely a lot better (though it can still get pretty bad, especially in Markarth), and I can actually play the damn game now, but it's still not fixed, and it's still unacceptable. I've also gotten a LOT more freezing since the patch. Like, at least once every time I play for a couple hours or more. I actually just lost 40 minutes of progress because of a freeze and had to take a break because I got pissed.
I've definitely experienced the framerate drops, but (thankfully) it doesn't seem to be as bad as others have been running in to.
My game did freeze after an auto-save this morning and I was afraid it would end up corrupting the save. If that would've happened, I would've lost my mind.
My game did freeze after an auto-save this morning and I was afraid it would end up corrupting the save. If that would've happened, I would've lost my mind.
Mine has frozen during autosaves a few times now. It will usually corrupt most of the recent autosave files, but it's never messed with my manual saves, thankfully.
I just want to say that I've put hours upon hours into Fallout 3 (PS3), even Platinum'd it and I never experienced the kind of random slowdown as demonstrated in that video.
Also, I'm pretty sure I can count on two hands how many times the game froze on me in all my time of playing.
My friend never had any of these sorts of issues either, and he platinum'd both FO3 and FNV, so I guess we just got lucky?
Also, I'm pretty sure I can count on two hands how many times the game froze on me in all my time of playing.
My friend never had any of these sorts of issues either, and he platinum'd both FO3 and FNV, so I guess we just got lucky?
I never had any of these problems in Fallout 3 (PS3) either. I put 60+ hours into the game too.
Did you play the DLC?
Stoffinator
Member
I do not believe any platform holder tests for such bugs. Its more or less how it affects security and running of the platform. Does it create a security hole to the OS? Does it brick the system? Does it comply to all the demands of the system? That kind of stuff. I don't believe the platform holders give two craps if the game runs fine or not. Nor should they, its not up to them to police third party studios.
AngelSoldier
Banned
I plat'd FO3 within 60 hour's as well. With only a couple problems here and there.
Plat'd New Vegas in like 90 hours, but with sooooooo many problems.
Skyrim ... Err. I got pretty close to the level 50 trophy but couldn't go on because of the frame rate nonsense. The whole event is just draining away my want to play this.
BruiserBear
Banned
The people blaming Sony for this are clueless.
That is the equivalent of blaming Sony for a terrible tv show you watched on a Bravia tv.
Hundreds of multi platform games have been made for the PS3/360, and none of them have the problems of this game. That is all that needs to be said.
That is the equivalent of blaming Sony for a terrible tv show you watched on a Bravia tv.
Hundreds of multi platform games have been made for the PS3/360, and none of them have the problems of this game. That is all that needs to be said.
I believe games fail certification if a memory leak is found.
Stoffinator
Member
I would usually believe that, but since this is a problem with all Bethesda game, I doubt very much Sony or Microsoft check for such stuff.
Ken Masters
Banned
They didn't test the game, that's the point. I can't think of any other reason as to why the ps3 version was released in this way. Every copy of the game is broken, it's not a random glitch. They decided to not send anyone the ps3 version for review, even when specifically asked for it. So they knew the issue was there after the ps3 version went gold.
So my question is this, how did ps3 publications give this game 90+ review scores? I'm looking at the meta critic scores for the ps3 and I once again laugh at gaming "journalism". Were these ps3 magazines playing the 360 version or did they stop playing after 10 hours? Which is it? Those are the only two explanations because the game is literally unplayable after an extended amount of time with the game, and this game requires an extended amount of time to play
jim-jam bongs
Member
If I were Sony I'd police 3rd party studios more rigorously given that so many of them have made a habit of releasing shoddy ports on the PS3, which damages the profile of an otherwise great system. The problem is that if they do that and it delays the PS3 release then people will buy the game for another platform, they miss out on licensing fees and end up with the worst selling SKU for multiplatform games.
MMaRsu
Member
Lets start emailing those publications en masse
guys, that ghst post is him making fun of this:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=32994109&postcount=11
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=32994109&postcount=11
jim-jam bongs
Member
I wondered about that, it did seem rather out of character.
Now it makes sense.
D
Deleted member 20920
Unconfirmed Member
I don't think wanting a game that they have bought to be playable is being spoiled. I rather they just don't make it for the PS3 if this is the way they continue with future games. There's a huge difference between getting a port that looks slightly worse and getting a game that can't be played (unless you're stuck in perpetual stutter time yourself).
Really? lol
If i had time on my fingers i would buy a domain called;
www.bugfestha.com
And put pictures of all the glitches(also videos) from their games just for shame and bad publicity for them.
But i am lazy.
www.bugfestha.com
And put pictures of all the glitches(also videos) from their games just for shame and bad publicity for them.
But i am lazy.
No, I didn't.
Evolved1
make sure the pudding isn't too soggy but that just ruins everything
The massive bug list compiled by members on their own damn forum is shameful enough.
Not really. They have a certification process specifically to curb serious issues like this. Clearly, they went easy on Bethesda in cert or didn't even bother. It should not have passed with those kinds of issues that cause ridiculous horrible framerate problems. Either that or Sony needs to take a good hard look at their policies.
I don't know what certification does, but I don't think certification should function as another layer of QA. Does certification test games for long play periods? 65 hours, if so? Do they stress save file sizes and screw with physics to see how far they can push the game?
I'm not sure what a game has to do to not be approved, but Bethesda certified this as gold. And they knew about it. They are first and foremost negligent and should pay for it.
Oh, in no way am I trying to deflect blame from Bethesda. They are 100% responsible for the issues with the game. I'm just saying letting Sony off the hook on this means that they don't look at why this happened (and most likely keeping them on the hook means the same! :/ ) and they should. It makes their system look bad and makes it seem like they are a second or third tier system when these sorts of issues pop up repeatedly on PS3.
Grinchy
Banned
If Sony's cert people were tasked with playing Skyrim for 65 hours, I am in the wrong line of work. I want that job!
(also I agree. I can't stand that people are defending a product that shipped like this)
SolidSnakex
Member
This link says that most of the requirements are protected by NDA's
http://www.train2game.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/pdf/Certification-For-PC-and-Console-Games.pdf
But from reading around it sounds like they mainly focus on stuff you'd see within a few hours of starting the game.
theDeeDubs
Member
I'm over 100 hours in and have only experienced one freeze and that happened before the patch. It takes me 8 hours of solid play before I start to get slowdown and to me that is perfectly acceptable. I focused mainly on guild quests and daedric artifacts and only unlocked random dragons before the patch so I'm not sure if that had a lot to do with my smooth gameplay post-patch. I'm curious how much dragons/main questline npcs and their corpses played into the problems prepatch.
Funny because Fallout 3 froze like crazy and was almost unplayable for me on PS3.
Funny because Fallout 3 froze like crazy and was almost unplayable for me on PS3.
jim-jam bongs
Member
Perhaps the solution is to have some sort of penalty system for developers who certify games as gold, only for it to come out later that they're a mess? No idea how you'd enforce it though.
I dunno, clearly Bethesda are the main culprits here but I guess that as someone who mostly plays PC games, where there is no single gatekeeper for certification of a release on the platform, I feel that they're missing an opportunity to enforce some standards which are, at least in this case, pretty basic. I mean "game must not drop to 0fps" seems like a pretty reasonable request.
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
If this were about money, there is more to be made on the PC3 than the PC. All of this is due to PC dev houses like Bethesda not spending the money on hiring console programmers. The fact that the best performing Bethesda PS3 game was a port done by a third party tells you something about Bethesda's PS3 developers.
If you can't handle a three platform release, you either ramp up staff, take more time or delay one or more. In this case, they could have delayed until march, used the time to iron out both the game bugs and the engine bugs.
Ken Masters
Banned
Again, the what were reviewers of ps3 publications playing to be generating these high scores?
SolidSnakex
Member
OPM UK is the only PS3 publication to put a significant amount of time into the game before reviewing it. They gave it a 7/10.
That would be me, was gonna pick this up with my trade in credit from my PS3 fat, now I rather send them hate mail.
Stoffinator
Member
Problem with Sony (or even Microsoft) taken the reigns for such stuff is money. Like you mention, it also can be an issue with release schedules. If MS gives it an ok, but Sony doesn't, does that mean Bethesda should delay all releases? Probably not.
IMO this isn't Sony's or Microsoft's doing. It's the developers. This isn't the first time they've done shotty work. They either need better programers or a better engine. Maybe they need to do what Valve did when they started PS3 development, hire some Naughty Dog guys.
Did they say how many hours they put into the game?
Well done for once.
jim-jam bongs
Member
Yeah, that's fair enough, if you read my later reply to Kev I'm sort of just spit-balling on how a platform holder could prevent this stuff rather than trying to push the blame on to Sony. I'm not under any illusions about who is mostly to blame for this debacle, it's definitely Bethesda, but if I were in control of certification for a platform I'd find a way to put them through the wringer for it.
There's no way I'm buying this game. Fuck that. Even if they fix it the save file issue, the game seems to crash a lot and stuff. I wouldn't want that to screw up my PS3 or it's. Too bad for Bethesda, maybe they can actually get proficient coders next time (ask Naughty Dog for some help 
).
).yellowjacket25
Member
I was actually really looking forward to playing this once I finished Dark Souls and Uncharted. I doubt I will ever buy it unless they fix the issues. It's hard to believe they haven't fixed it already.
Oh my.. those videos. I was gonna double dip but gonna hold off or just cancel that thought now. 360 version is running pretty well for me so far but post patch it locks up every day it seems.
Really sorry for PS3 owners on this one.. I sure hope Bethesda fixes this but who knows if that will happen before 2012
Really sorry for PS3 owners on this one.. I sure hope Bethesda fixes this but who knows if that will happen before 2012
Please do. I don't know if banning is fair but people either don't read or don't know what empathy is. Really frustrating and sickening.
Hope you PC and 360 people are loving this. I know I am, at least until it becomes unplayable. Here's hoping patches continue and eventually fix things for us PS3 gamers.
Thanks Eurogamer, keep up the good work.
Wow, I'm shocked that they actually called the issue out. And then shocked they only marked it down to 7/10. A game this broken is 2-3/10, easily, until fixed. Like how all those media sites trashed SOCOM:Conf when it launched when broken, but of course, Skyrim gets a free pass in most.
People are upset over the PS3, I'm upset that the PC version is a bugfest as well. I'd like to get my money back but I doubt Steam will do that, and I know bethesda won't for sure, as they don't give a shit about the consumer apparently.