DLC for PS3, BULL****!

[Paro]

Ok, I'm getting pretty pissed about all the awsome stuff that's only coming out for the Xbox360. For example the GTA4 Lost and Damned, and especially the Fallout 3 Broken Steel Expansion. I mean come on! Just because some of us own a PS3 doesn't mean we should be classified as lesser gamers who don't deserve DLC for our games!I have nothing against the Xbox, I would just REALLY like to see this stuff come to the PS3 the same time as the Xbox (or eventually as opposed to not at all).I'm sure that it wasn't just Xbox 360 users who thought the end of Fallout 3 was kind of a brick wall of "Huh, guess it's over." After you've been playing it for nearly a month levelling up character to maximum awsomeness.That's crap! I'm sure it was both sides were equally "perturbed" by it. So why does the Xbox 360 users get to be the big rich snobby DLC horders, while we have to walk around their big mansions created out of bricks of DLC content and be satisfied with what we have? Sony had better start stepping out to the plate,

[Ouch!]

It's because Microsoft shells out stupid amounts of money to make the DLC exclusive to their console. It's the closest this generation seems to get to exclusive titles.

[Iceglow]

Nice rant there, still it's not all bad. You get the blu-ray we get the DLC just think it's balanced out somewhat LOL. Sorry this is why Sony lets it's customers down. It's not just the Sony PSN which is unfortunately weak. It's the availability of content on it as well. Sure necessary bug fix patches like the one released for Fallout 3 (a game in your rant used as an example no less) generally on the day of release are fine, heck we 360 users have to put up with our machine AUTOMATICALLY downloading any updates or refusing to go online otherwise.

The Sony PSN is a weak system, ok so the console is £100 more expensive on average than a 360 and hardware wise I have a hard time finding faults apart from heat from extensive use, but that doesn't cover the cost of Sony maintaining it's network they've only just in the last year begun producing PS3 consoles for below cost meaning it's only just begun turning them a profit and for the last few years every console made has dug them a nice debt which in the current economical climate is a bad thing.

Now heres why we get DLC content and you don't and it's bluntly put; money. 360 users pay a measly £3 a month to go online with their console. In exchange for this we get stability and lots of free content such as certain arcade games and updates/patches/mods for some games. Now I know the PSN also offers arcade style games for free and well done on Sony for doing this. However we're paying and our servers are more stable for it, we also tend to have better quality arcade titles than the PSN offers all this comes down to the £3 a month we're paying. Now add in this, Sony whenever you need to pay for a DLC asks you to pay by credit/debit card and screw anyone who doesn't have one in this day and age, believe me I know for a fact some people don't I live on my own, go work full time, pay rent but for some reason my bank tells me theres a lack of activity on my account for me to get a debit card. Microsoft on the other hand introduced the Microsoft Live Points system, whereby owners can either purchase online via their consoles using their credit or debit cards or else go buy a validation card from a store for cash and simply redeem the code. This means the DLC content is far more readily available to it's target audience. This means that a new expansion for Fable 2, Halo 3 or Fallout 3 ect ect is going to do twice as well on the 360 as it will on the ps3. Easier time buying it = more people do buy it, more people buying the product = more $$$ in your account. Hence 360 users get more DLC, it's all about the damn money involved.

How could Sony improve the PSN? Well for a start lets see them sort stability. I dislike "paying to play a game you've already brought" as much as the next person and thats why I haven't gotten in to Warhammer online or World of Warcraft. However in paying the £39.99 or roughly £3 a month for Xbox Live gold membership I have access to any of my games which have an online multiplayer. This is far better than paying £9.99 per month for 1 game online. I am sure many playstation 3 owners who read this would agree if there was a similar charge from Sony for the PSN then so long as it meant more DLC and better stability of the servers they'd be overjoyed to pay it without complaint. They could also introduce a "points" payment system like used on the Nintendo network and the Microsoft Live networks. This allows them to open up their content to a much bigger audience and thus attact developers to doing DLC for their format so long as they also start producing store buyable "redemption codes" as well which would grant varying numbers of points similar to the Xbox Live points and Nintendo points already available.

With the stability and the increased chances of revenue for developers Sony sure as hell would attract more developers in to producing them some DLC. Though theres also a slight matter of how many active gamers there are on the respective networks. Xbox has been around slightly longer and had a significant headstart on other formats in this. Wii overtook because it's cutesy, gimmicky bull crap (If Roto were to read this he'd probably be incandescent with rage at me for bashing nintendo about but I say bite me to that :P) but as far as "serious" gaming machines go theres more 360 users than ps3 users.

Also as a please note: I don't hate the PS3, like I said as a piece of hardware it's clearly the superior statistically speaking machine, it also is the best blu-ray player on the market. I think it's got a few promising in house "exclusive" titles but over all it's just not quite there yet for me. Sony really need to decide exactly what it's final specification will be, I don't know if they completely canned the 160gb or just postponed it for another time due to the economic reccession or what but gamers want consistency in their machines. They don't want to spend £400 on a console only to find out a year later that for £100 less they could have had it with 2 or 3 times the storage capacity. Microsoft recently changed the 20gb core for the 60gb pro to go in it's line up but that was done because DLC on the 360 really has taken off and brought console gaming to a whole new level they never removed or added any extra features such as the ps3 - ps2 backwards compatability nonsense, Sony on the other hand just can't seem to make their damn minds up. Theres only one current gen console I really genuinely don't like, thats the Wii because altough it's without doubt fun, it's too childish and gimmicky for my tastes. The overall message for Sony to read if they ever read this post is: Fix the damn specifications of the machine in stone, stop dicking your customers around, sort your network out to be stable and reliable, charge if you must because as long as you get better stability and more DLC available then your gamer base will grow exponentially, DLC is not some little fad which will die off it's become a critical part of gaming for most gamers.

[Dreddz]

So you would rather have dlc over full retail games? Microsoft choose to spend their money on dlc and Sony choose to spend their money on games. Thats why dlc has been the only notable thing released exclusively on the 360 this year and the PS3 actually got what mattered, games. I hope that Sony keep up their strategy as I'd hate to only have dlc for my console.

Nice rant there, still it's not all bad. You get the blu-ray we get the DLC just think it's balanced out somewhat LOL. Sorry this is why Sony lets it's customers down.

Sony let their customers down? Have you seen the PS3's lineup? You must have very low expectations if DLC keeps you happy.

It's not just the Sony PSN which is unfortunately weak. It's the availability of content on it as well. Sure necessary bug fix patches like the one released for Fallout 3 (a game in your rant used as an example no less) generally on the day of release are fine, heck we 360 users have to put up with our machine AUTOMATICALLY downloading any updates or refusing to go online otherwise.

Well first of all PS3 owners have to automatically update their machines before returning online as well. And don't speak about content because both the PSN and XBLA are pretty neck and neck when it comes to that. With their being more re-releases on XBLA and more original content on the PSN.

Now heres why we get DLC content and you don't and it's bluntly put; money. 360 users pay a measly £3 a month to go online with their console. In exchange for this we get stability and lots of free content such as certain arcade games and updates/patches/mods for some games.

And Microsft must be laughing their asses off at people like you who defend the charge by calling XBLA more stable and offering more free content. Your selling their service and they don't have to do anything. Reality check, both PSN and XBLA are equally stable and the content is on equal terms as well. Wise up.

Now I know the PSN also offers arcade style games for free and well done on Sony for doing this. However we're paying and our servers are more stable for it, we also tend to have better quality arcade titles than the PSN offers all this comes down to the £3 a month we're paying. Now add in this, Sony whenever you need to pay for a DLC asks you to pay by credit/debit card and screw anyone who doesn't have one in this day and age, believe me I know for a fact some people don't I live on my own, go work full time, pay rent but for some reason my bank tells me theres a lack of activity on my account for me to get a debit card. Microsoft on the other hand introduced the Microsoft Live Points system, whereby owners can either purchase online via their consoles using their credit or debit cards or else go buy a validation card from a store for cash and simply redeem the code. This means the DLC content is far more readily available to it's target audience. This means that a new expansion for Fable 2, Halo 3 or Fallout 3 ect ect is going to do twice as well on the 360 as it will on the ps3. Easier time buying it = more people do buy it, more people buying the product = more $$$ in your account. Hence 360 users get more DLC, it's all about the damn money involved.

Ill give you that one point about Sony not offering a point system. I have no issues with their system though and its pretty rare for someone not to have access to a credit card at any age whether its theirs or their parents. It really isn't an issue.

With the stability and the increased chances of revenue for developers Sony sure as hell would attract more developers in to producing them some DLC. Though theres also a slight matter of how many active gamers there are on the respective networks. Xbox has been around slightly longer and had a significant headstart on other formats in this. Wii overtook because it's cutesy, gimmicky bull crap (If Roto were to read this he'd probably be incandescent with rage at me for bashing nintendo about but I say bite me to that :P) but as far as "serious" gaming machines go theres more 360 users than ps3 users.

Firstly, quit with the stability thing. Your wrong. And exclusive DLC is usually governed by whos willing to pay. In 90% of all cases they go to both consoles.

Also as a please note: I don't hate the PS3

Nope. Your just someone who bought a 360 and now feels compelled to "fight the good fight" and hate on the competition for simply not owning their console. A fanboy if I ever saw one.

The overall message for Sony to read if they ever read this post is: Fix the damn specifications of the machine in stone, stop dicking your customers around, sort your network out to be stable and reliable, charge if you must because as long as you get better stability and more DLC available then your gamer base will grow exponentially, DLC is not some little fad which will die off it's become a critical part of gaming for most gamers.

The specifications on the PS3 is fine, their customers do not get dicked around, their network is stable and reliable.....and free and they don't need to waste their time on dlc and can deliver full retail games instead.

Seriously, after reading all that your clearly very ill-advised when it comes to this sort of stuff.

[Dignified Pauper]

Just shut up and wait for Fat Princess.

[Momiji]

So why does the Xbox 360 users get to be the big rich snobby DLC horders

Nice generalization. I didn't know we were snobby DLC hoarders on our consoles that die every two months or so, while PS3 owners get what is technically the better system with Blu-ray and Disgaea 3.

Stop your whining and play some of the good PSN games that you get that we don't.

[Madame Adequate]

I have to agree. As a 360 owner and fan I honestly don't care too much about DLC, except for Halo map packs (Haven't even got Lost and Damned yet). And yeah, Dreddz is right about games > DLC. I know that I'd rather have Valkyrie Chronicles than any amount of DLC. It's honestly quite a petty thing to be going for exclusives on. And if there's a good game out there, it stands to reason that I want as many people as possible to play it, increasing the chances for a sequel.

Reasonability aside I'm trying to see how I can best stir up fanboys in this thread but it's really quite difficult to decide what to go for.

At least we're all agreed that the Wii is , eh?

[Iceglow]

Dreddz, you're clearly a PS3 fanboy. You've made it evident and whilst I am a fan of my 360 I have a good thing to say about the PS3 though it's online capabilities in comparison to the 360 are sorely lacking and it's not just me who says this, every person who I know with a ps3 and most with both the PS3 and 360 consoles heck even some with the Wii as well agree the 360 is the best for online play.

As for the hardware? First the PS3 has a 20 gig hdd and backwards compatability, 40 gig hdd soon followed, 60 gig hdd after that, currently it's an 80 gig hdd and no PS2 backwards compatability, one of the other models since the 20 had backwards compatability, I forget which one exactly but the other previous released version of the PS3 did not. On the day they released the 80 gig hdd version of the PS3 Sony announced a 160 gig hdd model to be released "in the next year" Now, whether they scrapped that model or not I can't say what I can say however is; If 5 different hardware set ups announced so far some with PS2 compatabitlity and some without is not dicking around with your customers what is? I truly generally feel sorry for those who brought their PS3's with 20 gig hdds for £400+ when now they could get 4 x the memory space or if they keep their word on the announcements made 8x the memory space for £100 less than they paid. When Sony stop messing around changing what the PS3 has for features and settle on a HDD size and the compatability features ect then they have set their console in stone and got a finished product. If it was Microsoft who continually changed their features on the console you'd be the one saying "microsoft are as they usually do dicking around with their customers" instead of me it's just a matter of fact that aside from a single upgrade to the hdd and the new xbox live experience they haven't actually changed much about them. Sure they released the Elite 360 but thats a seperate console on sale for a higher price.

As for the comment on Games > DLC I would rather have 5 decent DLC packs out in 6 months than 10 crapily made games in 6 months, that said I do not imply the PS3 does not and has not had some decent games released this year or at any other year for that matter. Just because the PS3 is getting titles doesn't mean it's getting anything the 360 isn't and when it does get something exclusive theres a lot of crap titles on both consoles which are unique. Stuff like GTA IV Lost and Damned pretty much makes a albeit smaller but well made seperate game within the GTA IV world mechanics this is far better than a crap 6 outta 10 or 5 outta 10 game. GTA IV is a great title on both conoles but I would still take GTA IV L&D over a mediocre or crapily made exclusive title on the PS3 anyday. Just because it's a full game does not make it immediately better than a downloadable add on if that was true then why would anyone as big as the Bungie or Rockstar studios bother with it? Your complaints that Microsoft doesn't even need to sell DLC because I'm here selling it for them are valid. Microsoft doesn't need to sell DLC to us it's been sold by fantastic DLC packs such as Lost and Damned and dare I say the Legendary and Mythic map packs for Halo 3. I will be recomending DLC packs to gamers, probably because they're good to get and can add huge amounts of fun to a game this means Microsoft do not need to send a representative to us here to sell it :P Now, lets be serious for a second, your gripe that DLC is not full games is now sounding more like a disappointed PS3 owner whose a little jealous of those 360 owners.

[Jiro]

You should think about this before you purchase a console. Saves complaining about it in the end.

Alternatively, you can get a PC. I hear PCs win in most departments, despite having to wait a tad longer for a lot of games.

[ljkkjlcm9]

The Pixel Junk games you can download to the PS3, namely Pixel Junk Eden, are better than anything you can download on the 360... and that's a fact!

PS3 gets far more exclusive original games for download which are better than WiiWare or the 360 arcade. Even I am willing to admit that, and I'm anything BUT a Sony fanboy, I typically hate on Sony.

THE JACKEL

[Dreddz]

Dreddz, you're clearly a PS3 fanboy. You've made it evident and whilst I am a fan of my 360 I have a good thing to say about the PS3 though it's online capabilities in comparison to the 360 are sorely lacking and it's not just me who says this, every person who I know with a ps3 and most with both the PS3 and 360 consoles heck even some with the Wii as well agree the 360 is the best for online play.

I'm merely defending the PS3. I'm not the one writing extensive paragraphs on why the other system is bad. And I never said PSN is better than XBL. In fact it definitely isn't, but XBL isn't leaps and bounds ahead of the PSN which is why I'm against the charge no matter how little money it is. I just feel that 360 owners should stop defending it just because they have to pay it.

As for the hardware? First the PS3 has a 20 gig hdd and backwards compatability, 40 gig hdd soon followed, 60 gig hdd after that, currently it's an 80 gig hdd and no PS2 backwards compatability, one of the other models since the 20 had backwards compatability, I forget which one exactly but the other previous released version of the PS3 did not. On the day they released the 80 gig hdd version of the PS3 Sony announced a 160 gig hdd model to be released "in the next year" Now, whether they scrapped that model or not I can't say what I can say however is; If 5 different hardware set ups announced so far some with PS2 compatabitlity and some without is not dicking around with your customers what is? I truly generally feel sorry for those who brought their PS3's with 20 gig hdds for £400+ when now they could get 4 x the memory space or if they keep their word on the announcements made 8x the memory space for £100 less than they paid. When Sony stop messing around changing what the PS3 has for features and settle on a HDD size and the compatability features ect then they have set their console in stone and got a finished product. If it was Microsoft who continually changed their features on the console you'd be the one saying "microsoft are as they usually do dicking around with their customers" instead of me it's just a matter of fact that aside from a single upgrade to the hdd and the new xbox live experience they haven't actually changed much about them. Sure they released the Elite 360 but thats a seperate console on sale for a higher price.

I think your putting Sonys actions in a more negative light than nessesary. Sure Sony have had issues with what they want the PS3 to be but they are only going through this hell so more people can get their hands on one. People are banging down Sonys door for a price cut and all Sony can do is make revisions on their console to lower the price. And your wrong about what stages the PS3 has been through. Sony made a 20GB and 60GB and then dropped the 20GB for a 40GB with a few features cut and then simply upped the 60GB to 80GB. There are only two versions of the PS3 out now, a cheaper model with fewer features and a more expensive model with more features. Its not that difficult to understand and I don't symphathize with anyone who can't figure out what system they want.

As for the comment on Games > DLC I would rather have 5 decent DLC packs out in 6 months than 10 crapily made games in 6 months, that said I do not imply the PS3 does not and has not had some decent games released this year or at any other year for that matter. Just because the PS3 is getting titles doesn't mean it's getting anything the 360 isn't and when it does get something exclusive theres a lot of crap titles on both consoles which are unique. Stuff like GTA IV Lost and Damned pretty much makes a albeit smaller but well made seperate game within the GTA IV world mechanics this is far better than a crap 6 outta 10 or 5 outta 10 game. GTA IV is a great title on both conoles but I would still take GTA IV L&D over a mediocre or crapily made exclusive title on the PS3 anyday. Just because it's a full game does not make it immediately better than a downloadable add on if that was true then why would anyone as big as the Bungie or Rockstar studios bother with it? Your complaints that Microsoft doesn't even need to sell DLC because I'm here selling it for them are valid. Microsoft doesn't need to sell DLC to us it's been sold by fantastic DLC packs such as Lost and Damned and dare I say the Legendary and Mythic map packs for Halo 3. I will be recomending DLC packs to gamers, probably because they're good to get and can add huge amounts of fun to a game this means Microsoft do not need to send a representative to us here to sell it :P Now, lets be serious for a second, your gripe that DLC is not full games is now sounding more like a disappointed PS3 owner whose a little jealous of those 360 owners

Well in the context that you have put it in I would definitely rather have 5 decent DLC packs than 10 crappy PS3 exclusives. But thats not what is really happening. Sony have delivered on its exclusive titles for this year and from what I have heard the Fallout 3 DLC hasn't even been that great. Ask any PS3 owner what they would rather of had this year, Killzone 2, Flower, MLB and Noby Noby Boy or some DLC for GTAIV and Fallout 3. Also if we are on DLC then its worth noting that there was some pretty good DLC for Valkyria Chronicles released a few weeks ago.

At least we're all agreed that the Wii is , eh?

I actually think the Wii has done alright this year. Tenchu, MadWorld, Little Kings Story and House of the Dead all this year. I'm probably going to buy one soon actually.

[Psychotic]

(Haven't even got Lost and Damned yet).

Get it immediately. Even though it's shorter than the regular GTA IV story line, I enjoyed it and the features it added a lot more than Niko World, which kind of dragged on a bit. The missions are of a much higher quality too, imho, none of this temporary invulnerability crap.

Anyway, that's the way the gaming market works. Some consoles get exclusives that others don't.

You should think about this before you purchase a console. Saves complaining about it in the end.

This man speaks the truth.

[Fonzie]

Oh you guys and your console wars!

[Madame Adequate]

As for the comment on Games > DLC I would rather have 5 decent DLC packs out in 6 months than 10 crapily made games in 6 months, that said I do not imply the PS3 does not and has not had some decent games released this year or at any other year for that matter.

Well yeah you blatantly do imply that otherwise you wouldn't make the comment in the first place. If the PS3 does actually get decent games then the statement you made is completely pointless.

@ Dreddz: Yeah I'm looking for games that are actually good before declaring the Wii not .

[Momiji]

@ Dreddz: Yeah I'm looking for games that are actually good before declaring the Wii not .

Trauma Center, Castle of Shikigami III, and Milestone Ultimate Shooting Collection.