Despite being the launch day of Sony's long awaited, oft delayed online social marketing networking service, this PS3 owner is finding himself increasingly disgrunted by Sony's seeming indifference to Microsoft's superior exclusive disc-based DLC. Having owned nearly every major console since Sony's first Playstation, I consider myself a dedicated gamer. The only reasons I haven't purchased a 360 are because of the (supposedly now corrected) RRoD issue, the annual fee for Live and the fact that I barely have enough time as it is to play the PS3 games I have. Two of the best gaming experiences I've had this year come from GTA IV and Fallout 3 - both sandboxy shooting games which play drastically differently. Between the two of them, I burned over 100 hours immersed in HD carnage and I don't regret a moment of it (except when my friend jumped out of his second story window, but that's another story). Needless to say, I was eagerly anticipating news of any DLC which would extend my stay in Liberty City or the Capitol Wastelands; word came down the pipe early on that the 360 would be receiving exclusive DLC for GTA IV. I was disappointed, but when I heard rumours that the recently announced DLC for Fallout 3 would be 360 exclusive as well, let's just say "extreme disappointment" doesn't even come close. Together, I paid over $140 for the two titles (got the GTA Special Edition, even lining up at midnight for the local launch) - why is it that people who bought the same titles for the 360 at the same (or lower) prices are now getting more options when it comes to gaming? Sony seems to have been focusing its efforts on getting Home up and running by the new year, but at what cost? Sure, it can play current gen games, but it's looking increasingly like gamers need to have the 360 version to enjoy additional content (at least for the AAA+ titles). Having been underwhelmed by both LBP and Resistance 2 and in conjunction with Microsoft's aggressive price drops (not to mention having to blow another $150 on upgrading my hard drive to accommodate the increasingly massive game installs), I'm finding myself wondering if I need to look elsewhere for my HD gaming fix - if I see a $199 Jasper, it's not gonna be much of a question.
Kotaku writes: "A Resident Evil Requiem review published by long-standing UK gaming news site Videogamer has been removed from Metacritic after readers pointed out it was written by a fake AI journalist who doesn’t actually exist. Videogamer‘s human masthead was gutted last week, sources tell Kotaku, and the site has been publishing apparent genAI slop ever since."
New York attorney general Letitia James called loot boxes 'quintessential gambling.'
The League of Legends maker has eliminated around 12 roles across three publishing teams.
The dlc was announced exclusive for the 360/PC before the games were released. I understand were you are coming from though. I think it really isn't a matter of Sony failing the fans it's just probably wasn't the most sound business decision to get in a price war with MS over DLC. Both those games already have many hours involved in game without the need of extra missions later on. Yes the dlc will be fun and everything but it seems with 3rd party exclusives now not being the biggest factor this gen it'll be about dlc.
So while PS1/2 had many games on the system no one else had it'll be more like the systems will get the same game but later on one of them will get some form of dlc only to the system. Same idea different execution.
I don't think they failed their fans. Fans usually stick with you no matter what. I think they underestimated online's importance and power. DLC on LIVE ins't always superior. In fact, few game DLC's are worth it, but it's still nice to have it. It's obvius online service is an integral part of MS's agenda and well, they have the fruits of their labor. What turned me away from Sony after I got their system at launch, is how litle their online service has grown. It's evolution has been a slow one compared to LIVE's.
Remember that no console is perfect. No console is going to provide the best grafics in gaming a year after it's launch. That's why pc's are constantly being upgraded and you'll always need a good gaming pc to stay on the edge of tech. Consoles should be about being comfy, no hastles gaming. No upgrading and no having to know code or update drivers for everything or to fix a problem. You can't get a console because they said it would run all games at 1080p running at 120fps. A benchmark on a console is stupid because new tech is going to pop up in 6 months anyway. A console has to be about the experience. We all want to be dazzled with grafics, that's why we buy ps3s and xboxes. But that can't be the ultimate tool of judgement.
I feel you should get the xbox and put it right next to your PS3 because your still gonna need your PS3 for great gaming and blueray. MS has done a wonderful job with 360. Sony has done a wonderful job with PS3. If you can afford it, reward them both. I don't think anybody really wants SONY or MS to leave the gaming business. If you do get an xbox remember that the full year subscription is the cheapest at $39, and that it's worth it only if you game alot online, and that if you do get an xbox you won't be able to resist going online.
PS: If your a true gamer you'll need all consoles and cards to get your gaming fix. It's like being a junkie and there is no such thing as enough.
PPS: DLC's are overrated exept for DarthVader on SC4 imho. I havn't paid for any other DLC. I've downloaded DLC for free, but never paid for it.
To fail their fans sony would completely have to ignore them and make sure that most of their products are canceled. This isn't the sega dreamcast, Sony has proven to last and the ps3 is only 2 years old. Take a look at the ps2's history, it didn't have very much to begin with. Later through the years it has gained its exclusives and games.
my copy of fallout 3 from game fly for the next 3 months (sorry if anyone else is waiting for it on there q they have other copies) just for the dlc it makes the experience alot more but yeas there is a price tag to it i bought the godfather dlc, bring down the sky dlc, halo, cod4 , and a few others and everyone of them has been a solid purchase,, guess while your bowling on home ill be on fallout 3 dlc ... oh yeah i didnt get the shiviring isle on download i just rented the new disk with everythign and installed that ... yeah dlc can be a little pricey at times but its worth it...
Sony didn't fail it's users... nothing could be further from the truth, for one... they tried everything possible to make PS3 fan worthy and continue to try to do so... with firmware updates that are actually designed to improve and offer things fans want..
They also wanted to make sure that you didn't have to pay just to play online. Trying to follow a more PC gaming experience..
As far as download content, that's an epic fail on the part of the companies who make the DLC... Not Sony.. for one, it is believed right now by big companies that making DLC for the PS3 is a waste of time because they won't even re-coup the cost of making it.
Now Xbox 360 has a huge install base that is known for paying for download content.. great example (COD4's download content sold huge numbers on day one for 360)
Not so big on PS3... And this is a major huge game where talking about. Now think about how many copies of Fallout 3 sold on PS3 (348,566) -Now consider only a quarter will buy the DLC and you quickly see the problem.
So when companies take that into consideration, the first thing they are thinking about is can we make the money back it will cost to make it and then, make a profit? On PS3, well at least for right now, it's not looking as likely. -This is the real reason why DLC is not coming to PS3...
So Until sales of PS3 pick up in a major way then this is not likely to change.