You're actually paying more

Wait, that doesn't make it much better. Why should you? Because they're giving you the best they can on your platform. That's just how it works out, I'm afraid - do you also want extra content because I can run it at a higher resolution?
To complain that you can't do as much with a locked, closed system as you can on an open system is silly - surely you knew that going in? It's sort of inherent in their design.

I meant collectively. We make up far more than PC gamers do in the sales numbers, so Bethesda is earning more of a profit from their console versions. It would only make sense that a significant portion of that is spent doing something for us console gamers (rather than making the game "pretty" for PC gamers).


And you could always go buy a console if you wanted exclusive content, and I think console gamers more than make up for the cost of quality DLC by contributing more in sales numbers than PC gamers.


That doesn't justify leaving console gamers in the dark while PC gamers are able to take advantage of anything extra Bethesda throws at them.

PC Quality Does Developing For Consoles Detract From it?

Ultimately no, the budget for these games is much higher because the game is released on consoles. Consoles are a mixed blessing but the disadvantage of being held back by old hardware is blown away by increased budgets for games.

And YOU could always go buy a PC if you want mods, better graphics, and console commands.

Assuming they follow the same sort of design structure as Oblivion and Morrowind (And given modding support is confirmed, that's highly likely), DLC is inherently cross platform. There is no further development to make it PC DLC. It'd just be restricting it arbitrarily.

Unlike a DX11 patch. I'm sorry if your platform is 6 years old, but that's really no reason to try and take things away from other people.

Bethesda gives us the creation kit because we can actually USE it. Same with running better graphics. Beth has no control over how more powerful PCs are than consoles.

In the interest of fairness, there sure is.

The Xbox 360 has an achievement system and access to the Kinect device. Do you think it'd be fair if Bethesda had delayed Skyrim's release in order to make use of those two things? No, you wouldn't. Anyone buying Skyrim for the PC would cry and whine and rant about how unfair it was, and that they deserve more for, well, whatever reason they can come up with at the time. The Xbox 360 also has Xbox Live, which enables interaction between friends, even during gameplay. Should Bethesda take advantage of that as well? No, PC gamers wouldn't allow it. If they did, PC gamers would whine even more. Same could be said for the PS3 (excluding Kinect).

So why is it too much to ask that they give us some exclusive DLC?

A DX11 patch wouldn't cause the game to be delayed though. That's why it's a patch. And no one would [censored] about how it was "unfair", it'd be more about how "useless" kinect is and how it's a lame reason to delay it's release.

Like I said, there's nothing stopping you from going out and purchasing a gaming PC so you can enjoy using the construction kit, console commands, and running the game in higher settings.

No, but other PC features would. The Creation Kit they use is nothing at all like the one they release, and even then I'm sure they develop the game in such a way that allows others to create mods.

What? I would assume Skyrim does support achievements, most games do. Xbox live support would imply a multiplayer component, which is a bad idea for entirely platform agnostic reasons. Kinect support would also work on PC, and Move support would be a parallel on PS3, so again, that wouldn't be a platform specific thing at all.

Anyway, why on earth would a post-release patch impact the release date?

edit: Assuming they release the CK in the same way they released the CS, it pretty much is their internal tools, with support for things they don't have the licenses for stripped out.

Honestly, I personally think the only real thing, at least for Bethesda, that will hurt the PC version is the UI. On everything else, Bethesda has always been really attentive to make sure the PC version is up to par and not inferior or held down by the console version, but the UI has definitely not been one of those points. Hopefully we won't see the huge font and only 5 items on the screen like with Oblivion.

I wholeheartedly agree. Like I said, I would LOVE to see a DX11 patch sometime, or even have the PC version release with such features, but as long as they take their time and make things such as the UI function and flow smoothly on PC, then I guess I can wait on texture mods to release and what not.

Regardless, Darn will probably release his famous Darnified UI anyways, and I'll probably use that anyways!

So while we're on the topic of Skyrim related tech that's used, what is this new Creation Engine? Did they finally ditch Gamebryo?

It looks like you're right about achievements (Fallout 3 has them, but I didn't remember them in Oblivion at all) and Kinect, though adding support for both it and Move would surely take quite a while -- something PC gamers wouldn't like, even if console gamers begged for it.

It also looks like the release date was a wrong example to bring up. However, since it couldn't be added to the PC version pre-release, it would probably take a bit of time to create (and resources), both of which could be spent on developing another game or creating DLC. That's just more time and money put into making the PC version better, even if it isn't what sells the series to gamers. Given that console gamers are the biggest market for Bethesda right now, something should be done to make the game more enjoyable for them. No, simply making it for consoles isn't enough. The PC version gets many things that the console version doesn't, and the excuse that it's justifiable because the PC is capable of those features isn't a good enough for me.

It's better for them to appeal to their largest market, which would mean console-exclusive DLC or other enhanced features. You can say all you want about that being unfair or selfish, but if it's consoles that earn Bethesda more money than PCs, more development time and resources should be poured into features for consoles.

But the DLC will work on ALL platforms. If they make it for one, it will work on all, and releasing it for all three will get them more money rather than releasing it just for one or two.

EDIT: Yeah Oblivion has achievements on XBox. I have a copy of the GOTY Edition and just checked.

I believe Oblivion on Steam had achievements, don't know if that was patched into the console versions. As for kinect, it's fully supported, both officially and unofficially, on PC - I think it's a stupid idea not because of platform issues, but because *it's a stupid idea*.

A DX11 patch certainly could happen post-release, it'd be harder than writing it at first, but there are no limitations on what a patch can do, it edits files, that's all. If they have their level designers and quest authors writing my DX11 patch, I don't want it! Graphics programmers, on the other hand, I'd love to have working on it. The two needn't interfere at all.

It's better for them to appeal to their entire market - arbitrary console-exclusive DLC is entirely against that. There's absolutely no reason to limit it, other than to satisfy your jealously.
I would assume that when Skyrim is done, they're going to start work on whatever they're doing next. This game will almost certainly have most, if not all, of the features we silly PC gamers want, simply because it'll be released in, probably, half a decade's time. They're writing it anyway. Being able to release it as a Skyrim patch would require a different approach, and a little more work to package it, but it's far from doing it entirely for PC gamers playing skyrim - they're going to do it anyway. It'd be awesome if they decided to patch it in later, but that's really a decision they have to make now, and stick to it, otherwise it'd be too much work to justify.

I'm not saying anything about "unfair" at all - I do think that you wanting exclusive content because your platform can't run modern technology is selfish, however.

And I think being forced to buy a more expensive PC in order to make use of PC-specific features is unfair, so which one of us is in the wrong?

Call it selfish, but if consoles make more money for Bethesda, they should get something that's exclusive to them rather than that money being used to make a better PC version.

Sorry... They said it would be a new engine... But its Gamebryo moded edition. They made some changes to the engine and decided to do the PR talk and say its a new engine. sadly it will be the same ****



PC: Things scale... The average computer will run a game on higher settings then a console could ever do with the potential of higher fps.

Im sorry but if you want to get options... Dont use / buy a closed system.

Well, I think you are. There is absolutely no reason to make console-exclusive DLC, at all. In any way.
You have to buy a PC to make use of PC exclusive features because they literally cannot be done on console. There is no such limitation the other way around. There is absolutely no reason to limit arbitrarily.

There is, but you don't seem to agree with it. Console gamers are putting more money into Bethesda, but getting less out of their games compared to PC gamers. They're also paying the same price, if not more, for the console version of a game that offers less than the PC version. That's reason enough for console-exclusive DLC. I'm sure that if console gamers made up a mere 30% of the market, a similar argument would be made (or even one that pushes for a far superior PC version).

I don't agree with it, no, I don't see why Bethesda feel they should arbitrarily limit who can give them their money. Is my money worth less to them? How could, for no real reason, not releasing something on PC in any way be a good move for them? It just means they piss off PC gamers, and get less money. Why are either of those good?

They said they've wanted mods to be able to be used on consoles. It's up to Sony/MS though. Also, your system would have to be able to use the CK, and it's not. It's not Beth's fault that the consoles are 6 years old.

Or they appeal to even more console gamers and get even more money. They're also making the console versions similar, meaning they aren't taking advantage of the advantages both the PS3 and 360 offer over each other.. so why should they make an exception for PCs?

And well you are abit wrong... You pay more for games because you are on a console. Do you know where the money go? To either $ony or Micro$oft. They take a large sum of the money from each game sale on consoles. There is even more potential to make lots of money if they use steam (and so on) on the PC as you get a larger cut of the money as you remove lots of middle hands.