Back to the time around x-mas, dead money got released for the xbox360. I got exited, thinking that in late january I'd get dead money for ps3. My new character was all set, but then it never came. After a whole month of waiting I finally saw it in the ps3 store. But 2 whole months of waiting had been too much, I stopped playing new vegas and never bought the dlc. Perhaps I'll buy a dlc package with all dlc after 2 years, or maybe not. I'm just wondering who else did the same as I did. Sony needs to be a month faster than it was, it's hardly worth it now that I'm tired of NV to buy a 10€ dlc, that only features one real quest. If I would have gotten it while I was in flames and enjoyed playing it, it could have boosted my play time with weeks.

It's hard to argue with your point. Games can wear you down after a bit, and if the developer/publisher/whatever misses that window of enjoyment, they will miss out on sales.

Financially, they probably do fine with the payment for exclusivity offsetting money lost in sales, but it's still a shame that they blunt the enthusiasm of gamers with these types of deals.

Here's hoping that you can, as you indicate, build your interest back up down the road sometime.

I belive Microsoft PAID to have it come out for xbox first

I don't think the OP was questioning that. I think he was complaining about SONY not being willing to do something to shorten the gap.

I'm on 360 even I did not get it

The game by itself offers at least 60 solid hours of keeping you busy with quest & different ares etc.

Add to the fact I don't like standalone liner DLC I want a freaking expansions!

Where's the Shivering Islands guys when you need em :spotted owl:

Well there is nothing Sony can do when Bethesda makes an ironclad deal with Microsoft.

That's silly, of course there was. Business like that isn't done in a vacuum. SONY could have upped the ante to, at the least, shorten the term of the deal or, at the best for PS3 users, take it away from MS.

I was aware that the deal microsoft has with DLC content was 1 month, but in this case it was 2 months. i've played New vegas for a good solid 120+ hours, and if I would have gotten my hands on the DLC a month before it was released for PS3, I could easily have played it another 30 hours with the new toys coming from the DLC. And indeed Yasgur, my post here is all about the big gap between the DLCs, if you look at first strike for black ops, that had only one month and that is ok, but if it gets up to 2 months, especially if it's a single-player game, some gamers, like me, will not find the spark inside to start playing again. It's a great game with all it has, but it is a single player game after all. There's not endless replay value, but DLCs surely add something to the table, if you still enjoy the game. I just wanted to know how many others feel the same, I see some threads were PS3 players were exited about dead money, but I bought new vegas too early compared to when the DLC would have been released for PS3 to keep me playing all way through.

Deam Money is decent, but its nothing special and gets boring after an hour or 2. Trust me you can live without it. Its not worth giving up a game over.

It's $10 or so. It's a steal. Excellent add on, it's too bad you are bored with the game.

I'm old and have way too much time so I just try to get my character just right. 300+ hours and I think this 5th one will do. I might even finish the game with this one.

So you are mad at sony, but the DLC came out the same time for PC, so why are you complaining? PC users had to wait just as long.

This is why I get in on 360. I could get games on PS3 or PC. But I choose 360 since they usually get DLC exclusives. I hate that they do this, but it's not something that's going to change anytime soon. If anything it'll get worse.

It's strange too, I now prefer console gaming over PC gaming. I guess I just got use to it.

Another theory on limited expansion: while I have no doubt that Microsoft paid for exclusive rights, thinks about how glitchy the release version of New Vegas was, especially on PS3. New Vegas was built for Windows XP or better, which is more or less what 360 runs on. Not saying they shouldn't have had it for PC simultaneously, but by releasing the DLC on the system it was built for, they had more time to patch it for PS3 users, as well as PC users since PCs tend to have more software issues than consoles. Just my two cents.

look on the bright side least you dont have to wait ages for a game of the year, and least now the dlc will come out at the same time for all consoles

It's not sony's fault

I agree, with the statement of dev's missing the gap of when players are still interested in games, i thought that with the release of the PS3 and pc versions that they would announce the next dlc soon, not the case, gdc has passed and my interest in New Vegas has waned, all it would have taken would have just been the announcement, back to wow it is

So when Microsoft drove a dump truck full of money up to Bethesda's door and got them to sign an exclusive deal to let Microsoft be the first to release it for x-amount of time, Bethesda could have then turned around and let others have it and not get their butts sued into the ground?

Yep ruined FO3 for me the same way. Sony was shafted on oblivion content as well, actually never getting a good chunk of it at all. Hoping this trend doesn't continue into skyrim. But if history has taught us anything. If you compare the various products these rival companies produce its some kind of tragically sick irony.

My thoughts exactly.

The truth of the matter is that Microsoft's money is alot greener than Sony's. After the deal was signed there was no way to counter it.

dont you see .. Microsoft paid to get the dlc faster .. and sony didnt .. .. sony doesnt need people like you complaining about stuff like this because theres nothing u or they could do ... why waste money on something that u will end up getting eventually ... and not only that ... BORED OF FALL OUT .. the only way u can get bored of this game is if u beat it 17+ times ... fallout is a game of limitless adventure ....and there are many other games so dont cry about a dlc .. ps3 is still better than xbox and u know it because thats why u have one

not really .. i believe sony can come out with just as much green .. yea its microsoft one of the biggest if not thee biggest company in the world ... and guess what ... sony is right there behind them .. . sony doesnt need to release dlc early ... they all come out at the same time and who ever wants to pay get it earlier .. so no u didnt wait an extra 2 months ... u waited the normal time ... people need to learn to be patient ... if u really want them first they go buy a gay box and stop bickering aka [censored]ing

all this exclusive crap is just that, ''crap'' if a game comes out for all platforms there should be no exclusives, the ppl that make the game are the ones to blame, they should have turned round and said no the game is multiplatform and dlc will be for everybody.

Okay...

1. Stop bashing the 360, console wars are not allowed here.

2. Microsoft has waaaaayyyyyy more money than Sony, the two companies aren't even in the same league financially.

3. Stop being so insulting, everyone has a right to an opinion.

It was only 2 months of exclusivity its not that long. I don't see what the big fuss is. I have not even finished doing everything in New Vegas yet so I really don't need DLC.

it's interesting to see where this topic has taken us, the argumentation is mostly reasonable and I appreciate that. But I'm not here to start another pointless console war, the main point is the gap between the DLCs: Dead Money for NV got released 2 months later for PS3 but First Strike for BOPS got released only 1 month short. I just don't see what happened there, did microsoft really buy a 2 month right for NV, but only 1 month for Sony?

I realize PC gamers and PS3 players are flowting in the same boat so to say, which is an odd thing when taking into account that the PC version is also a part of microsoft. However, still that gap I'm talking about. Both Ps3 and PC got first striker a whole month sooner than dead money. But PC games have all the mods and stuff to keep them playing a game for hundreds of hours more with new weapons, armor, clothing and stuff. Sort of free DLCs just to pick what you choose in the candy store

I played new vegas so much all the way up to the release date I thought I'd get dead money on. Now I'm trying out morrowind while waiting for Skyrim. Perhaps I'll buy all the DLCs that have been released for NV 2 months before Skyrim, i don't know yet. Same thing again, the gap. read above and tell me what you think happened. Did microsoft really buy a 2 month exclusive for dead money and only 1 month for first strike? or did sony ante up to shorten the gap because they perhaps knew first strike would sell much better than dead money?

Just so everyone understands me correctly, I'm not complaining per ce. I'm only taking this up because it happened to have this disappointing effect on me. I'm onyl trying to find out a few things here, in addition of knowing how you guys and gals feel about this. I see some agree with me and understand what I'm driving at and it's good to see that I'm not the only one who feels the same.