Wait, Oblivion was better on PS3? Since when?

2007, apparently...

to be honest i can't blame beth for the previous transgressions against PS3 users, the system is notoriously hard to optimize for, code for and the install base is much lower then the 360 from a fiscal standpoint it is a second thought, im not saying this is ethically correct but from a business standpoint the PS3 isn't a priority



i was under the impression that the PS3 version of oblivion was actually less visually appealing due to poor anti aliasing and shadows

Since Skyrim is using a heavily modified version of the same engine, and Bethesda don't have a whole extra year to port it over to the PS3, unfortunately I think us PS3 owners will likely once again draw the short straw. It will still probably be great, but it will likely suffer from the same AA and framerate issues that most multiplatform games have. Even the games where the devs claim they are identical usually favor the 360 due to it being easier to program, and therefore the lead platform. I would love to be proven wrong, but it is something that I have come to expect...

The ps3 version had a much better draw distance, improved graphics, and faster load times. It did have poorer textures on things like roads and houses, but everything else looked better.

shouldnt they be able to make it run smoothly with the Blu Ray discs?

I think this time the PS3 version will be as stable as the 360 version.
Now i don't want to start a war...but one poster said it was smoother on PS3....that is not the case,and it's even worse with the DLC.
The xbox uses it's memory better,thus making it a little smoother.
I hope all versions are good,i don't think PS3 users have to worry at all this time,oblivion was different matter.
It's been nearly 6 years since that,so don't worry
I also hope PS3 and PC users get the DLC at the same time as xbox.We all buy the game,we should all be treated fairly.
They also said it's looking sharp on PC and PS3 also.

Im kinda confused by a few statements that the PS3 version of Oblivion ran better than it's 360 counter part??? i have played and nearly beaten both due to console life issues with my 360 that have sense been worked out but I really can honestly say it ran better on the xbox other than loading times being faster on the PS3 (which has alot to do with the pre-game install i assume since the HDD runs faster than the Blu Ray and DVD9 drives). I noticed less detailed textures mostly in the enviroment and ground textures (and after bethesda updated 360 with the few graphics improvements that shipped with the PS3 version of the game, it just wasn't a question to me) and framerate issues, I never experienced and bugs, though sorry to the unlucky PS3 players who got stuck with these issues (really kills the flow of the game i can imagine). Really the only complaint i have is that the loading times were longer and with the 360's new dashboard update where i can download whole games to my HDD from the disc i no longer suffer from long load times on oblivion which i am currently playing again due to having to wait 9 months for skyrim! To stay on topic though i see skyrim working just as good on PS3 as on 360 for they have been working on both consoles and have time to balance the two, im sure PS3 will have better load times if the pre install is still part of the plan(ill make room on my 360 HDD to lessen the load times) , and i think 360's framerate will preform better slightly (as in it's hard to notice between the two) as it usually does on crossplatform games just due to the GPU running slightly higher and the shared memory between the CPU and GPU. But i don't think theres going to be a major difference between the two. uplifing* lol No need to worry

Well it came out on March 20th, 2007 on the PS3. :thumbsup:



That's not necessarily true. Many, many developers have said they had no trouble developing for the PS3, including DICE, Infinity Ward, Crytek, and of course most of Sony's first party developers like Naughty Dog. Who do you believe? I don't know but it seems to me that if a developer really wants to they can get their PS3 games up and running without much of a hassle.

As for the install base, that to is not necessarily true. Both the PS3 and the 360 have roughly 50 million units sold, with the 360 ahead by a few million. It's projected that the PS3 will have a higher install base by the end of this year.

In regards to Oblivion, it has been stated on multiple sites, and even shown in various video comparisons that the PS3 version of Oblivion was technically superior to the 360 version. Better draw distance, less frequent loading, shorter loading in general, higher resolution textures especially at a distance on on facial models, and a better framerate. I don't want to turn this into a flame war about PS3 vs. 360, but that's just based on personal experience with both versions, and professional comparisons online.



Well unfortunately, Blu Ray space doesn't really have much to do with a games core performance. It's more of an advantage for texture resolution and uncompressed audio. However, the ability to install portions of the game onto the PS3's HDD should alleviate some of the work load of the PS3 itself. If some resources are already on the HDD they shouldn't have to be loaded in as frequently from the disc. I'm not a programmer though, so don't take my word on this subject, this is solely based on my experiences and research into how game systems and games in general work.


Bethesda definitely has the ability to ensure both console versions are nearly identical, and the fact that this engine was build after the PS3's launch, unlike Gamebyro, gives me hope that they had the PS3 in mind while making Skyrim's engine. Only time will tell, but I feel... reserved optimism this time around. I just hope that both Sony and Bethesda both realize that the Elder Scrolls should be shared equally with the world when it comes to DLC. Fallout it one thing... but TES is in a whole other league.

an important factor you are missing is the style of game being created, all of those developers you just mentioned make shooters primarily and one massive difference between shooters and open world RPGs is the interactivity between players and objects, typically in shooters unless its Halo objects are all locked in place to save processing power for hit detection and to reduce lag online, now the sheer amount of physics which is a large hit to memory done in a game like oblivion is staggering almost every object has some form of interactivity, for this same reason Halo doesn't go past 16 players online its a trade off between interactivity and numbers. Now the same reasoning apply s Beth games because there is so little physical memory in current gen systems (512mb) most of this is handled int he GPU and CPU which can make processors like the Cell a detriment to quality. different code uses different parts of memory and requires different methods in memory allocation and processor use. So a shooter may be very adaptable to all systems while an open world highely interactive game might be difficult to program for on hardware as different as the cell (a 128 bit system)

Very true. Thanks for pointing that out! I do agree that the PS3 is certainly not as easy to develop for as the 360, considering all the similarities between the PC and the 360's hardware.

I do think that it's possible to make use of the advantages the PS3 offers though, and Bethesda obviously did so with Oblivion on the PS3. Perhaps it was because the team porting the game to the PS3 only had to worry about programming for that system alone, whereas with Fallout 3, all systems were being developed for at the same time. Like I said, I would gladly wait an extra month or two for Skyrim if it meant my copy of the game preformed as well as or better than the 360 version. I will still try and be as optimistic as most have been on these forums though. With Skyrim's engine being built up after the PS3's release, I will take that as a sign that they had the PS3 in mind while making it as well as the other platforms.

i think your certainly correct, when a team is only dedicated to a project i have no doubt an excellent PS3 product is produced sadly it seems to suffer when a team is just expected to adapt to the changes rather than focus on them. Its an equation of time and money to often do we as fans forget that this is a business and the people who make these wonderful games need to get paid corners get cut

Yep and unfortunately Bethesda Softworks likes to take Microsoft's money to ensure the DLC gets to 360 players before PS3 and PC players. That's not only affecting PS3 players, but also PC players that, according to this forums polls, is the most popular platform for Skyrim. :sadvaultboy:

Pc players are overrepresented in this forums because Oblivion mods has kept much of the fan base alive, and it migrated here then Skyrim was announced.

For my part I think it's nice of the xbox users to beta test the DLC for us

Haha, yeah, I suppose it is nice that if problems arise in the DLC, Bethesda can possibly make sure it's fixed by the time it gets released on the other platforms. Besides, if Skyrim is anything like past TES games, I doubt DLC will be needed for a long while after release.

Paying for exclusive DLC is a smart move by Microsoft and to be honest its a smart move on Bethesda's part to take the money, and PC copies of Oblivion sold less then half as much as the console equivalents honestly they are only over represented because PC gamers tend to be more involved with the communities. I doubt Beth will go with console exclusive DLC though eventually everything will be released across all platforms

And every other developer out there lol microsoft and sony both pay royalty for exclusive content and games, publish developers games, and even merge there selves with developers to keep them on their console, why do you think sony has such a big exclusive set of games now (killzone 3, little big planet 2, grand turismo, god of war, infamous 2, socom 4, uncharted 3, resistance 3, motorstorm) all exclusives to the PS3 because one thing... money. Microsoft has to be competitive and bethesda has to make money so there you go, really it just how developing great games goes nowadays.

We must admit that the Xbox360 can do great thing with only DVDs... But the PS3 has BLU-RAY...that means 25Gb of memory storage.

And the PS3 is can handle more than the Xbox360... Uncharted 2 would never run on an Xbox360.


Also, it's hard to compare game graphics between the two consoles, because Multiconsoles are usually ports on the PS3...

But if they take the time to program the game correctly on the PS3, I wouldn't mind waiting longer... If Skyrim would look more like Morrowind... But before I buy, I'm gona wait for reviews (M.net ...Because they aren't paid to give good ratings, they are payed to make reviews.)... And I may also upgrade my laptop, because if there'S things I don't like, I may rather mod them out...

But the PS3 deserves respect... Valve learned that Microsoft isn't meant for them, if they want to put free DLCs.

Have problem understanding this, if I made a game I would want to release it on all platforms to get more sales. Most people have only one console and they will seldom buy a new one because of a game. So for the developer the missing platform is lost sales, yes they save money on only developing on one console but for big budget games creating the game world takes far more time than porting and they are pretty sure the game will sell well. The producer would want compensation for lost sale that will be very expensive.

Now a delayed launch of one platform makes more sense, Microsoft or Sony get publicity, the producer get more time to port the game and can use the developers and testers who made the first platform and they lose few sales. Very common that games comes to pc later.

I bet the game will cost around 65$...

Well... not to nit pick... but most of those games are exclusive to the PS3 because they are published by Sony and the developer is owned by Sony. Not money. They also get the benefit of sharing technology between each other, and having only one system to concentrate on as incentive. With Skyrim, the game is already being made on all three platforms. Sony rarely pays to have timed exclusive DLC. In fact most of the DLC they get is free to PS3 owners and never shows up anywhere else, like the Joker for Batman: Arkham Asylum.

But yes, Bethesda does need the extra money and PC and PS3 owner can wait for their DLC. :dance:

But is this ingame?
http://cms.elderscrolls.com/sites/default/files/tes/screenshots/CompositeMountain_wLegal.jpg

Looks waay to good compared to the trailer, imho.

That is indeed in game

Hmm, I don't believe it until I see it in game. We've been fooled before by things like that. For example, looks like this screen of these mountains have fantastic post processing on, and particle effects all over. While the footage from the trailer doesn't have the same post processing.

It would be great even if it looked half as good as that picture, no? :hubbahubba: