Hello am I the only on who is demanding equal treatment cause it's getting annoy and it makes me sick to my stomach to see the ps3 fanbase being treated like second class citizens.

So I ask is they any legal ground that Bthesda is breaking cause by threating them with it I think it would be the only way that they'll listen. I know this might appear extreme but for six-seven weeks Bethesda has said nothing and given us the cold shoulder and if it keep going on like this threating them seems more and more reasonable to me.

Thinks for reading I hope were you can see were am coming from.

Legal grounds? Are you kidding?
Spare me. It's not like our basic civil rights are being violated. Get over it already.

I'm not talking about basic rights, am talking about customer rights which Bethesda has broken. They sold the game to PS3 faulty thats one they broke- options return for money back or get repaired Bethesda still hasn't repaired Skyrim for PS3 this leads me to the next right they've broken which is the product doesn't match the description, Bethesda said that the PS3 Skyrim was in fine working condition that worked just as well as the X-Box's Skyrim but it didn't - option return get money back or repair again Bethesda has failed to repair Skyrim for PS3. Now how have they failed every bug a PS3 user reports still in there game every PS3 game out that has that bug buts is how we play that, I use this word "triggers" the bug. I'll give you an example but I see your just a troll.

Unfortunately there are no legal grounds.

Firstly, software is exempt from the laws that surround warranty and guarantee. So we have no claim against the bug in the core game

Secondly, all software is sold "as-is" and by using the software you are agreeing to that condition, meaning that there's no requirement to fix flaws within that software. So we have no claim on the lack of a patch for our platform.

Thirdly, the claim that the PS3 version worked just as well as the 360 was made by Pete Hines on his own personal twitter account, legally speaking that makes it his opinion. So we have no claim to false advertisemant.

Lastly, you didn't buy the game from Bethesda anyway, you bought it from your retailer so any exchange or refund falls under their jurisdiction not Bethesda.


I'm not saying that Bethesda doesn't have questions to answer for their game or their treatment of us PS3 users because the clearly do, but legal action is an impossibility, there's just no grounds for it.

Thanks for sharing it svcks that there nothing we can do but what if there something to do with discrimanation towards us. I mean this is what the dictionary say about discrimantion-

1.
an act or instance of dicriminating.
2.
treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.
3.
the power of making fine distinctions; discriminating judgment: She chose the colors with great discrimination.
4.
Archaic . something that serves to differentiate.
The word group and category caught my attention and I wondering could we fall into but i'm sure there's no law or human right that help back it up.

As far as Bethesda, games, and getting treated fairly ( or in a similar fashion to Xbox users ), become used to the idea of being the angry red-headed step child. Beth simply has no interest in learning how to code for the PS3 platform, as it is easier for them ( and just as profitable I might add, since everyone keeps forking over their money ) to continue to code for an x86 based architecture and just port that directly over to the PS3 and then telling you, the consumer, that somehow...the PS3 has reached a similar level of parity with the Xbox version. Beth has a nose that is about this ----------------------------------------------------> long when it comes to that! However, as Murt said, legally, there simply isn't a leg to stand on, or anything that can be done in any way to actually receive "equal treatment" as you put it.

I've accepted the fact that Bethesda will still treat us this way for a very long time but I still think that we should continue to demand it cause it is in my eye worth fighting for equal treatment. But what I really don't understand is why? Why do they dis-favour us I mean we haven't really done anyrhing to them excpet but buy thier product I would really like to hear this question answered. Is it because of MS money bribes or is it cause they find the PS3 hard to work with or something entierly different.

About the best we can hope for is for the gaming media to keep an eye on what has been happening, initially they were oblivious but gradually as the truth came out some of the reporting started giving Bethesda the criticism it deserved. Now they keep a watch more actively so bad press will surface more readily.

I'm surprised TRUTH isn't blocked by the text parser censor on here as it's most likely a dirty word in the Bethesda dictionary.

This article was write two weeks ago.
http://www.product-reviews.net/2012/07/01/skyrim-1-6-patch-for-ps3-understandably-late/


Yea it was poor writing but at least it bring people to talk about it.

According to the definition released by the National Endowment of Arts this year:
source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2011/05/12/video-games-now-legally-considered-an-art-form-in-the-us/

I would think the above would start to provide some legal recourse to consumers as it opens doors for other rational questions. Can independent game developers seek government funding -- grants ( suggestion made in the above linked article)? And maybe it is time to advocate for a change in laws covering warranty and guarantee. The flip side is probably not desirable. Should game companies become responsible for releasing "bad" products, some companies may opt to get out of the game development business all together for fear of class action lawsuits popping up everywhere. Thus, lawmakers would have to define what constitutes a "legal" product and can be considered protected against frivolous lawsuits. I'm not talking about copyright protection. That is a different area. I'm talking about - for lack of better terms -- a lemon law for "interactive games". There are a whole bunch of questions to be asked and answered in a sensible fashion.

When is an interactive game considered a "lemon"?
How should laws governing false advertisemant be applied regarding advertised features left out due to business decisions yet never publicly retracted?
Who is ultimately responsible for the product -- retailer, publisher, or developer (liability)?
What kind of clocks should be established for patches that prevent interactive games slipping into a "lemon" status?
What about product recalls? The problem with this question is software is a non-physical product. It's not real -- tangible -- and therefore poses no "physical" threat to consumers. And no, don't bring up epilepsy. If that is an issue, you shouldn't even be using the computer -- ie: a strobing light in the form of screen refresh rate.

I'm sure you could come up with your own questions. I'm just shooting from the hip here and I'm not a lawyer.