What glitches?
I’m level 9, and good to go, thus far.
If they are bad, I’ll go ahead and cop it on my PC… and xpadder too, I guess - considering how it’s designed for console and all.
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk
Well the original big glitch was once your save file got to a certain size the frame rate dropped horrible, and continued to drop as your file got bigger. They did a recent patch which has screwed up a lot of other things. My friend never had crashes before the patch but gets them all the times post past (and he did start to notice the slowdown before the patch too.)
From what I’ve read, basically once your save file goes over a certain filesize, it causes horrible stuttering in the game - at times going to down 0-1 FPS. Most people say this is about 60 hours in (which is only a fraction of how many hours you can put into the game). It really sucks.
Okay then.
Think we can get a class action lawsuit against Bethesda AND the cocksucking media who didn’t rat them out on this shit, but instead told us all three versions were pretty much equal?
I would gladly sue their goddamned heads off.
If I’d not been lied to, I’d have bought the PC version, and played it on my T.V. anyway.
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk
^are you kidding me?
Dang, Bethesda. Dang.
Stream going up in a few. Not sure what I’ll start with, but we’ll see.
I told ya’ll, don’t buy Skyrim, it will be a glitchy ass peice of shit, but do people ever listen to me? NooooooOOOOooooOOOOOOoooo.
Honestly I dunno how Bethesday continues to get away with this shit. Their games are glitchy as fuck EVERY time and yet no one calls em on their shit. Fuck that companies first party shit.
Three parties are responsible for Skyrim debacle:
[LIST=1]
[]Bethesda, because they knowingly released a game with critical bugs in it. I see some people talking about how Skyrim should get GOTY regardless of the problem, but I don’t believe a company who essentially robbed gamers of their cash should be deserving of such recognition, for all the good it does.
[]Sony, for their apparent lack of quality control that these platform holders are supposed to have. Do we really need to go back to 90s era Nintendo-style QA to get things done?
[*]The media, for not informing its readers of the issue. Some sites even had the audacity to copy/paste their 360 review and pass it off as a PS3 review. This proves that they either didn’t play the game long enough, or they didn’t play at all. I’m leaning towards the latter because Bethesda did not hand out review copies of the PS3 version (likely to avoid an unfavourable review). It’s hilarious that IGN would call out Bethesda on the issue when they gave the PS3 version a 9.5. IGN pretty much exposed themselves.
[/LIST]
It seems that Metacritic pulled the reviews from the site, so damage control is in effect now. I would like to see what Bethesda is going to do about the problem.
Got this from neogaf member stolin
Skyrim on PS3
Spoiler
Last night I finished Skyrim on PS3 and got the Platinum Trophy (160 hours). I’ll post some of the PS3 technicals on my play though here.
First off, this is the first Bethesda game that I didn’t simply turn off after 5-8 hours. I prefer JRPGs and more polished games, but Skyrim’s world captivated me to fully play the game.
The first 40-50 hours of play I had very few issues. 2 hard crashes & 1 infinite loading screen transition, my save file was under 6MB. Then once my save file hit around 6.6MB the game really started to hiccup, not slide show yet. This is when I started to check the forums & read into the issues.
Around 60 hours I changed my play style since I guessed where this was all going. I maxed out my Speech Skill basically to get a good money supply and slowed down interacting with the world. I stopped grabbing items, searching chests, looting bodies, reading books, etc… I could make my own potions & sell them for more cash than what I ever needed. I build my ultimate Dragon Scale armor and was on my way to invincibility.
Around 80 hours, my savefile was 9.8MB when the 1.2 patch hit, which dropped is to 9.1 MB. Pre-patch, major slideshows 0 FPS all over the place. I could play for 30 mins then would have to drop to the XMB & restart. I was very close to stop playing. The patch extended that play time to around 2-3 hours before restarting.
I got hit with the Winterhold Legion Quest bug show stopper and had to restart a few hours of play to side with Stormcloaks instead.
From 100 to 160 hours, savefile from 9.1MB to only 11MB. I completely stopped interacting with the world as much as I could. Kill the enemies & ignore everything. The game hard locked about 10 times total.
For me there was no need to grab anything in the world for the last half of my play though. I could craft my own equipment, make my own potions for money, just buy everything, to not change any world state.
My suggestion if you want to fully finish up on PS3 is severely limit your changes on the world. It’s not the ideal solution since you should be able to fully immerse yourself & fully interact, but unfortunately Skyrim on PS3 performance degrades as you play.
I feel like is should mention that all versions have weird glitches, but the PS3 has game enders.
I just got invited to the Starhawk private beta! :eek: <—ME
smh in dismay.
AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
so that was the 2nd time i saw someone saying the fps went down to 0 frames. you know that means the game just froze, you should be starring at 1 still, not “0 fps all over the place”
im outi
Roberth
1 fps = 1 unique frame per second, which means the game still moves once per second.
0 fps is frozen
Im not sure if that’s what you’re trying to say or not.
unless its moving less than1 fps.
like if it moved 1 frame in 60 seconds, it wouldn’t be technically frozen. but your sample size from 1-59 seconds would be 0 fps.
the more you know
Listen - there’s no place for logic and (apparently-not-so) common sense in here, buddy. Be gone!
Yes.
So, in order to address the original problem, we shall now refer to Skyrim’s extreme lag problem as “less than one fps” at times.
CRISIS AVERTED EVERYONE
Unless we’re really going crazy, which I think we should, and start dividing that 1 second by 60 and saying “.017 fps.” Which doesn’t make sense but who cares at this point?
well. less than 1 frame a second would be zero. just like bit rates, frame rates can be variable. sometimes its 30 fps. sometimes its 22. sometimes it can be 0.
imagine you get pulled over by cop, and he tells you that you were going 70 in a 40 mph street. you tell him that you were going 10 mph for a whole mile before, so it averages out to 40 mph? or if you told him you were stopped at a light a 0 mph (the theoretical impossibility) for a whole minute, than got up to 65 mph in 5 seconds, it doesn’t mean you were going 1 mph for that period of time when the radar beam hits you.
btw, i’m totally just trolling people flexing over semantics. if dude said he had 0 fps, he might have had 0 fps. saying its an impossibility is just looking for some needless fault in his argument.
IM LEGIT PISSED
edit: no im not
No streaming after all tonight. Got on my Netflix tip.