Forum:Why are they not release downloadable content for ps3

Um... i just found this on the DLC page, "Three downloadable content packs will be released on Xbox Live and Games for Windows Live; *Bethesda has confirmed that the DLC WILL be made available to the PlayStation 3.* Each installment of the DLC will add new quests, items, perks, and other content to Fallout 3, and will be released from January to March 2009. Fallout 3 patch 1.1.0.35 is required in order to download and play the DLC." Is it true? If so then WHOOOOO!!!!!!! ;) If not then please could you change this!

Its coming to ps3, Bethesda already announced that it should be coming out sometime this summer starting with op anchorage and the other dlcs will be released 4 to 6 weeks apart (including point lookout and mothership zeta) -Blue67impala

This is Microsoft getting back at Sony for winning the Blu-Ray / HD-DVD war.205.156.188.254 18:13, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

It makes me mad that there is no news of new content for the ps3. are they going to release them to the ps3 or not. i would really like to have them! anyone with any answers to this please answer me.

Bethesda and Microsoft signed an exclusivity deal saying that only microsoft products would be able to download the packs. It's simply a way of microsoft making more money out of the game and stopping their rival, Sony from making more money.

so as being a ps3 owner im screwed! thats just stupid! aurgh!!!!!! i love this game and would love to keep playing it for a long time!

Because Microsoft payed a lot of money for the exclusive DLC for the 360 but do not worry its not financially a good idea to only release it on 360 it will be a timed exclusive and will show up on the PS3 eventually.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Bethesda-Says-That-The-DLC-For-Fallout-3-Won-039-t-Be-Coming-to-the-PlayStation-3-94738.shtml This was reported back on October 2nd:

Bethesda: Fallout 3 DLC Won't Be Coming to the PlayStation 3 Fallout 3 is going to be a blockbuster title for its developer, Bethesda. The studio behind the massive hit The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion has recently talked, through the voice of their product manager, Pete Hines, about the future game, especially about the Downloadable Content which will be available only for the PC and the Xbox 360, but not for the PlayStation 3.

In terms of size, it will resemble the Knights of the Nine content developed for Oblivion, which was pretty big, occupying almost 4 GB of space. Hines said that although that means quite a lot, it won't really be a full expansion pack for the game.

Although the decision not to bring the DLC pack to the PS3 isn't really fair, Hines went on and said that they are still getting the game they paid for. “For us, with a game that offers 100 hours of gameplay, we don’t feel like we’re sort of short changing you up front. You’re gonna get your $60 worth out of this game, no matter what platform you buy it for, because there is so much content and so much stuff to do. And you can replay it and have it play out differently. So I think we feel pretty confident in terms of, no matter which platform you choose, you’re getting a good experience that will hopefully be one of the best, if not the best game you play this year on that platform.”

He also said that this future DLC would possibly make the difference for a lot of players who can't really decide on which version of the game they should buy. “if you really sort of deadlocked and you’ve gotta have your reasons to make a decision between one platform or the other, then yeah, DLC may be one that may push you towards one platform.”

If I were a true PS3 fan, this decision would really make me sad, but still, a lot of console owners can buy the game for another platform and then enjoy the content it will later feature. Gsmikem 23:04, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

If it makes you feel any better, the PS3 trophies patch will be out in the near future. I personally think they will give PS3 the DLC eventually like they did for Oblivion, but it probably wont be until end of next year. Even then, that's not too bad considering Faalout 3 could keep me distracted till then. =) -- Cheese Talk to the Cheese 23:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

yeah, everyone has both the 360 and the PS3, i just cant decide which i wanna get it for. i know, ill just get both, thats smart. yes, im a PS3 owner, and i think this is a bunch of crap. thats one of the only reasons i havent bought the game yet. its one of my favorite games and i will not buy it just because they wanna cheat us like that. i hate Microsoft! the trophies are ok, but without the expansive content, its like they only gave us (PS3 owners) half the game.Kickassmunk 10:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Buy a 360, get better stuff. Better system = Better stuff. -HG

well see, ive always been a Playstation fan since its inception and ill always support it. the problem is that with the PS3, it seems that SONY just doesnt care anymore. with the 'alleged' capabilities of the PS3, nearly ever game should be equal to or greater then anything that comes out on 360, but low and behold, 360 is still topping the gaming industry. at first i thought it was due to the fact that 360 was first to hit the market and get a good foothold, and the initial popularity, but since everything that has anything to do with PS3 just does not live up to the hype they tote, its something else. Metal Gear and Little Big Planet have been the only games that actually lived up to the hype they created and there really isnt anything 'breakthrough' with either of those games. Home was supposed to be the coup de gras and prove that the PS3 was the 'system to have', but it turned out to be a huge disapointment (to me, at least). ive racked my braint tryin to figure out why everyone brags about how much better the PS3 is supposed to be and how much more powerful and capable its supposed to be, yet still disapoints on nearly every level. the only thing i can figure is that sony just doesnt care about anything more then the $$$. how could SONY let a name as big as Fallout be exclusive to 360, when the PS3 is supposed to be the best there is? easy, THEY DONT CARE.Kickassmunk 03:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I was a long time Sony fanboy. After my ninth PS2, and no word from Sony about why we kept getting DREs, I was happy to move on to the 360. Of course, it also had problems, but MS came out quick to admit their mistake, and offered to fix it for free. I don't expect perfection in my gaming experience. I understand that hardware is made by humans and we make mistakes, but I do expect great customer service when I am spending hundreds of dollars on a console. MS has great customer service, Sony does not. I am no longer a fanboy of any brand. I will buy the system that has the biggest library and best relationship with game developers. PS2 had it last time, 360 has it this time. Who knows which company will be on top next generation, but I will get the one with the most options. Gsmikem 20:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I think its awful that bethseda would release new content on all other platforms apart from ps3. It smarts a bit especially as items can be taken from the dlc into the main fallout 3 game, to me this means that the ps3 experience is lessened. It shows a big disregard for gamers and makes me feel dumb that I didn't get it for my pc - obviously a feeling I don't like [if this is the future of dlc then I think it is a worrying development in inequality for game platforms]. It makes me look down on bethseda as they will obviously jump for money rather than trying to make games for all gamers.

Just did a quick read over this and i'd like to remind everyone. Microsoft PAID for the DLC's. Sony didn't up the anti.--NeoScott 16:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

This reeks of being a short-term money grab by Bethesda. Yes, they got paid by Microsoft. Yes, we still bought Fallout 3 for the PS3. However, when the next game unleashed by Bethesda hits the stores, you'll have PS3 owners remembering how Bethesda screwed them over. Will everyone boycott their next game? Probably not, but some will.

Let's assume that this gambit by Microsoft completely paid off and totally destroyed the competition. You think if Microsoft ends up being the only game in town, that Bethesda is going to get another sweetheart deal from Microsoft. Hell no. If Microsoft becomes the only game in town game makers will regret it, since they won't have the two consoles competing for their work. "Yeah, sorry Bethesda, we used to pay $10 million for a game, but now we only pay $2 million. Take it or leave it."

Don't piss off half your clientele for one pay day. That's just bad business. LVTDUDE 20:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi guys. There's a little thing called "competition". Microsoft won, Sony didn't. You want DLC, you get the PC or 360 version. PlasmaFox 23:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't want it that bad. LVTDUDE 00:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

It pisses me off that Microsoft is buying out every single good game that is on the 360 and the PS3. They did the same with GTAIV. If this continues all microsoft will do is create a monopoly, which is not new to the company this has happened before with internet explorer and they got sued for it. If Microsoft creates a monopoly they should get sued because it is illegal. ThreeDog awoooooooh! 16:43, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Ugh i hate it when these firefights between fanboys start, it just ends up getting way off topic and ugly. Microsoft was offering more money and it was just an over all better choice for Bethesda...But the truth is, if Sony had paid to have the DLC exclusive to the PS3, and Xbox-only gamers were upset, Sony Fan-boys would be telling them to suck it up and go buy a PS3...which is seriously rediculous. People need to realise (at least people in control of what systems they purchase) that buying a PS3 is, at the moment, a bad investment. I did't go out and buy a 360 right when they came out, you know why? Because they were buggy and didn't have a large selection of games at the time...I was still content playing Halo 2 on my original Xbox and San Andreas on my PS2...but I waited...ended up getting a job and bought my own Xbox 360 along with a few games that i really looked into and decided I would like...Many of the PS3 owners should have done the same thing, but they got excited and didn't wait to see if the console would meet expectations. The PS3 is still far to buggy and needs time and attention, not to mention a better selection of games before it can be considered a worthy investment...but if you're content with playing Little Big Planet and a glitchy version of Fallout 3, be my guest. --Esscex 05:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * People who whine that the 360 version has DLC and the PS3 doesn't are like people who whine that Taco Bell has tacos and McDonald's doesn't. It's pointless and stupid, and it's not going to get anything done. Bethesda is not at fault here. Microsoft simply outpaid Sony, and for a good cause.
 * Burger King has tacos. --MadDawg2552 16:31, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * See, the thing is here, I'm not a 360 fanboy. I just don't like the PS3. People who play (and like) the PS3 exclusively are most often the 12 year old whiny kids and the older "internet tough guy" kids who smack talk everyone. You don't get that much smack talk on Xbox Live. 360 fans are much more tolerable. Let's not forget Sony's cheap rip-off of achievements they call Trophies. Think of it this way.
 * PS3 fanboy: LOLOLOLOL MICRO$OFT IS GEY SONY RULES OMG MGS4 IS THE BEST EVER FUK U 360 ROFL PWNED WAT NOW BICH
 * 360 fanboy: I don't like the PS3.
 * That's pretty much exactly how it plays out from my experience and I have been playing video games since before a lot of people that do nowadays were born. Sony is desperately trying to keep a foothold in the console market, and is failing - mostly due to the idiotic cost of the PS3 ($400-600) and the complete lack of exclusive games for it other than a select few FPS's and an interactive movie. They should go back to making digital clocks - I could spend that $600 to upgrade my computer to play Fallout 3, rather than buy it for the PS3 and get a glitched, buggy, unmoddable, and DLC-less version.
 * By the way, I've had my 360 since Christmas '07 and the only thing wrong with it is a loose cooling fan shroud, that was fixed with duct tape. PlasmaFox 17:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That's pretty much exactly how it plays out from my experience and I have been playing video games since before a lot of people that do nowadays were born. Sony is desperately trying to keep a foothold in the console market, and is failing - mostly due to the idiotic cost of the PS3 ($400-600) and the complete lack of exclusive games for it other than a select few FPS's and an interactive movie. They should go back to making digital clocks - I could spend that $600 to upgrade my computer to play Fallout 3, rather than buy it for the PS3 and get a glitched, buggy, unmoddable, and DLC-less version.
 * By the way, I've had my 360 since Christmas '07 and the only thing wrong with it is a loose cooling fan shroud, that was fixed with duct tape. PlasmaFox 17:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * By the way, I've had my 360 since Christmas '07 and the only thing wrong with it is a loose cooling fan shroud, that was fixed with duct tape. PlasmaFox 17:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Plasmafucks stop flaming -_- --Meca-dope 15:56, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Moral of the story: PCs pwn consoles. --Macros 17:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

i dunno if i really wanna get back into this debate because it seems like theres a bunch of retarded trolls on here now, but for anyone who is a fanboy of any system, 'your an idiot!' when it comes to 'which system is better', its pretty much 'apples and oranges', since both systems are really awesome, both are glitchy, and both companies suck balls. and i dont care what anyone says, ive had 4 PS2s and they have all worked perfectly fine and ive never had one problem with costomer service. and ive had my PS3 for over a year now and havent had more then the usually glitchy problems that come with any game for any system. all games glitch, thats just a fact you have to deal with. ive played nearly every system since the Commadore 64 and Atari systems (my first game as a child) i have had a Playstation since Playstation first came out, its always been a dependable system and i would recommend to anyone who wanted a good gaming system. PS2 came out and topped the market instantly and dominated even through the original Xbox release. the first Xbox was the best system of its time, had the best graphics and smooth gameplay, and supported one of the (and still reigning) best online supports. 360 comes out as a 'next-gen' console, yet still uses a similar operating system to the original Xbox, only alot better. the PS3 comes out as a whole new 'entertainment system' as the original Playstation was released as, but with a whole new system for developers to work with, getting away from the common pc style format. Microsoft obviously seems to have more money (at least more focused to the 360, currently) and is tryin to create a sort of monopoly with the bigger names in development. Sony doesnt seem to be as interested in capturing the 'exclusiveness' of games that helped make them popular. the latest hit was Netflix, which kinda hurt the versatility of the media outlet for the PS3. Sony has this whole 10yr plan with their system (which still shows promise), but is currently struggling due to 360 releasing all these pretty and high profile games and garnering all the attention. i am and will always stand by my PS3 for my own reasons, but ultimately im not dissapointed that i bought a 'less popular' system, only that its potential has not been met yet. to me its more about substance then quantity, the is alot more oportunity with the PS3 then with the 360. the only thing the 360 stands on is that it can render some graphics better and smoother then the PS3. and thats its easier for developers to create games for. so, i think everyone should start blaming the developers for not trying to go in new directions for their games. instead they are sticking to what they know already works and will make them money. it wasnt Microsoft that had to agree to the exclusive deal, it was Bethesda. its, Bethesda that doesnt wanna go through the effort to learn the PS3 format, because they know they already have the money with Microsoft. i dont blame either company (cept maybe a little bit on Sony for 'not' shoving this new system down the throats of the developers) i am, however, a little upset over the 'exclusive' crap lately and especially, if your gonna release a game on all systems, release it ALL on all systems. Kickassmunk 05:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

You guys need to calm down your getting pissed over one thing then your subject splits in two about whats better. I a PS3 fan all the way the 360 only interest me for halo,so I go to me grandmas. Yes it sucks that DLC won't be for PS3 but who cares all it is is extra money. Some of you are right PS3 is not living up to its legacy its like they became lazy. You plasma fox needs to shut up. Bullshit they trash talk on the 360 all the time, what your hate for the PS3 blinds you into thinking the 360 is better its all a matter of choice I think the consoles are equal its just what you want more. The reason why PS3's are expensive is the Blu Ray and the fact it comes with most of the features set in (unlike the Xbox) and I agree on what kickassmunk has to say you makes very valid points why release a game on all systems then not make extras available "What the hell" Thats Bethesda wanting to make a quick buck.

Yours truly, Raz0R3312 Feb 20 09

I don't have anything bad to say about the XBox. I've never owned it or played it. I've owned the PS, PS2 and now the PS3. There were a few reasons I went with the PS3. First, continuity using the same controller as earlier systems. I love the PS3 controller. Second, it would play my PS2 games. Third, it has a fully functional Blu-Ray player. Fourth, I've always had good experiences with Sony products, and everyone I know has had bad luck with a Microsoft product at one time or another. I'm one of those guys that uses Firefox, just to avoid Microsoft.

Both systems are amazing pieces of technology, and those that flame either system remind me of the people that root for a particular university, whether they attended it or not. Being from Michigan, I hear the U of M vs. Michigan State garbage all the time, and very few of them have any REAL reason for hating the other school, they just do.

The licensing agreement Bethesda has with Microsoft also reminds me of another university problem. The Big 10 recently formed the Big 10 Network, which some viewers can receive and others cannot. Some have to pay for it. Those that would have to pay for it rarely do. So, these schools get less publicity, and eventually I believe this will hurt their recruiting. Less Michigan kids see these schools on TV, but they see Miami, USC and Florida all the time. When it comes time to choose a school, the Big 10 will suffer because they got greedy with instant money and EXCLUSIVITY. They missed out on advertising to FUTURE students and student athletes. So, the students and athletes go out of state. I think Bethesda and other software companies risk the same thing when they don't allow everyone access to their DLC.

Only time will tell. LVTDUDE 18:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

i head that the ps3 was getting something different from the xbox live.Maccy Man the man with no plan. 06:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Sony does not need to appease its gaming community because they have several other money making endeavors. The PS3 is not their top concern so don't expect alot of DLC's in the future. skillpsycho