Sections

Skyrim’s Dragonborn, Dawnguard, Hearthfire DLC dated for PS3 in North America

Friday, 1st February 2013 15:25 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

Skyrim’s Dragonborn, Dawnguard, and Hearthfire DLC have been dated for PS3.

According to an announcement from Bethesda, Dragonborn will release on February 12; Hearthfire on February 19; and Dawguard will release on February 26.

All three add-ons will be marked down to 50% during their first week of release, and final dates for Europe will be announced as soon as more information is available

Breaking news

18 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. theevilaires

    I was gonna say they should be free after the disrespect they showed PS3 owners. I’m still not getting this. I refuse to support these fuckers anymore.

    #1 1 year ago
  2. Stoopid_Snot

    @1
    Disrespect? As far as I am aware It was a simple programming problem and Sony joined up with Bethesda for the last couple of months to resolve that problem. Yes, it was meant to come out on the 360 first but the PS3 delay of the delay was a programming issue.

    #2 1 year ago
  3. nimrod123

    @1, not really, its a PS3 issue with ram, basiclly a PS3 only has 256mb of ram…. in 2013 LOL (it also has a seprate 256mb of VRAM)

    a xbox 360 can have up to 512mb of ram (if it dosn’t spend it on video)

    the problem is that TES records EVERYTHING that happens in the save file, which has to load into the ram, on PC that could be 500mb files if you play for long enough and touch everything.

    even with the closer programing you still have trouble with so little ram.

    why do you think TES uses so many loading screens, its a concession to tech from 2005.

    if you want to blame someone blame sony for making a shitty console, and not bethsda for failing to pull a rabit out of their ass

    #3 1 year ago
  4. Dragon246

    @3,
    If they knew they wont be able to run a game on ps3, why did they released it then? Pure greed on bethesdas part.

    #4 1 year ago
  5. freedoms_stain

    @3, If the problem is that Bethesda designed an overly RAM intensive game, the problem is theirs and not the PS3′s. The PS3 hardware was set long before development on Skyrim began, when Bethesda committed to releasing the game on PS3 it was up to them to build the game around the hardware.

    The problem is that Bethesda are using the same ancient ass engine they’ve been using for over a decade and no amount of polished textures are going to compensate for the fact that more and more of that engine is becoming antiquated.

    #5 1 year ago
  6. monkeygourmet

    @5

    Using over 256mb of ram in 2012 is not really over intensive. The game has huge scope, perhaps the biggest seen on a home console;

    Huge game world
    Multiple paths
    Item collecting / forging

    It just took the a fuck load more time than was worth bothering with.

    They should have bitten the bullet and canned the PS3 release. Especially as 360 was the lead platform, even simple multiplatform games using the 360 as lead look and perform better on that console.

    #6 1 year ago
  7. freedoms_stain

    @6, it is if the hardware can’t support it.

    As I said, they knew the hardware from the start. They should have actually built a new engine like they said they were going to instead of giving Gamebryo an insufficient overhaul and slapping a new name on it.

    New Vegas was the last Gamebryo game I will ever purchase.

    #7 1 year ago
  8. monkeygourmet

    @7

    Yeah, like I said they shouldn’t have bothered.

    256mb is a stupid amount of ram for a console expected to have a 10 year lifespan though.

    I would argue perhaps more ram would have been more important than the Bluray drive from a gaming perspective.

    #8 1 year ago
  9. Kabby

    Except, consoles are made from a money perspective.

    #9 1 year ago
  10. monkeygourmet

    @9

    What as in they couldn’t afford to put in more ram? But they could afford to bump up the price with pointless Bluray?

    #10 1 year ago
  11. freedoms_stain

    @8, it doesn’t have 256mb of ram though, it has 2x256mb of ram.

    #11 1 year ago
  12. monkeygourmet

    @11

    256 graphics and 256 system memory?

    I thought it was the system memory that matters for games like this though?

    #12 1 year ago
  13. freedoms_stain

    @12, it only matters if your shitty ancient engine can’t adapt.

    #13 1 year ago
  14. Da Man

    Why should anyone give a shit about internet nerds who never rendered a cube on screen and don’t really know what’s an engine, yet think they ‘re somehow intelligent or something because they build their noisy PC by themselves?

    PS3 is inferior and this is a great example of that. Why don’t you guys stfu and adapt to to your inferior purchase?

    #14 1 year ago
  15. freedoms_stain

    Of different capability =/= inferiority.

    Bethesda found a solution, so what exactly is this a great example of?

    #15 1 year ago
  16. monkeygourmet

    @15

    They reduced the graphical quality

    #16 1 year ago
  17. Cobra951

    @5: “The problem is that Bethesda are using the same ancient ass engine . . .”

    Among other things, this is essentially correct. The low amount of RAM certainly hurts, but while a lousy engine built for PCs can be made to behave on a PC-based console like the 360, it’s going to really suck on something completely different like the PS3.

    #17 1 year ago
  18. drmack

    Alls I know it: I’m flippin excited for these to FINALLY come out!!!

    #18 1 year ago