Found an interesting written piece some of you may find interest in reading

http://www.bubblews.com/news/56911-bethesdas-current-gen-actions-can-have-a-negative-effect-on-them-next-gen

it will be interesting to see how well bethesdas's next game sells on PC and playstation

eh, I don't think it will actually be that big of a deal. Bethesda sucks at programming for the ps3, so if Sony's next system is easier to program for, I'm sure Bethesda will do a better job and gamers will hear about it and buy their games simply because Bethesdas games are awesome.

In regards to the Dawngard and hearthfire content that the ps3 doesn't have, Playstation gamers should be thankful that they weren't tempted to buy terrible DLC... I know I certainly regret buying it...

Bethesda screwed up big time on Skyrim on PS3. But that is it. I don't recall anything else negative they did this gen.

Sure it sucks but Sony fanboys need to get over it. Skyrim = 1game. 1game that did'nt run well on PS3. 1game that ended up still working at the end and was still great even w/o DLCs.

Skyrim =/= Bethesda. There is alot other games out there. Bethesda will be fine, worst thing that could possibly happen is that the sales of Elder Scrolls 6 are hurt because of this on the PS4. But I serously doubt that even this will happen since ppl have a way to short memory anyways.

No its their third game in a row that ran like crap on ps3.

I played and loved skyrim on ps3. The game through my many hours of playing I've only had one problem which was I couldn't swim after one of there patches (the game would crash if I went into deep water) which I thought was funny for a while. But I do find it odd that they can get there "most ambitious DLC" to work on ps3 yet can't get there less ambitious DLC to work, hmm.

Bethesda is probably the only publisher that can make me angry about QA testing. Especially because Obsidian got blamed for the bugs in Fallout: New Vegas, when in reality it was Bethesda's typical QA department doing a typical bang-up testing job.

Edit: Oh, and Polytron. They took five years to make Fez, and it was still hardly ready for primetime. Nor do I understand why it was so critically acclaimed, but that's a different issue.

The problem is game patches. They know that they are allowed to patch games so they skip right over the testing and let the users find the bugs. Then developers try to fix them with patches.

All console makers need to make a stand and have standards written in there for every major game breaking bug that makes the game totally unplayable X amount of % of sale revenue will be lost.

I think your in the monority here Dishonered is a great game if you take the amount of people that dont care , the amount that dont even know that it is a bethesda game and the amount that are not gonna deprive themselves of a incredible experience just to get back at a company I think you will find you line of thinking is not that prevalent.

That "1 game" I logged over 120 hours on. My experience would have been much better on the 360 however, but I still  managed to make Skyrim my GOTY 2011. With that said, it's not Sony's fault for being too hard to develop for. Every other developer figues it out. Bethesda, apparently has not. It's shere laziness. Knowing their game will sell either way, and better on the 360 at that, they just don't put in much effort.