What happens in Mass Effect when you beat the boss? You get credits. What happens in Super Mario 64 when you beat the boss? You get credits. What happens in Bioshock when you beat the boss? You get credits. What happens in MOST games after you beat the boss? You get credits.

This is nothing new in the industry. If Bethesda had decided to not release DC, no one would complain about this because they are used to it. This is why the DLC is awesome, it lets you explore the world some more!  Bethesda could have designed the game like this then changed their mind after it shipped and said "Wait, wouldn't it be cool if you could explore the world after the game ended?"

I guess everyone just likes to ride on the whaaaambulance.

Interesting. When the DLC was announced for the 360/PC, PS3 bots were like 'So what.' Now, as details emerge and they find out they can play past the credits ... ahhhh ... they are screaming bloody murder. What's the deal? The DLC is extra content and an expansion that would naturally allow you to play past the credits.

It's not a conspiracy or the like - it wasn't like it was hidden, but that's what DLCs are, most times. FO3 owners on the Box and PC knew it would be an expansion.

What is there left to discuss?!

yup thats why i bought it for the pc version for the mods and expansion.  There was no way in hell I was gonna buy it for the ps3 since i knew before hand it wasnt getting DLC and the mods is what made me get it over the 360.  So people screaming bloody murder of this shouldnt be surprise.

Well sometimes in RPG's you can still do whatever after you finish the game. I'm pretty sure in Oblivion you could  and it was made by Bethesda.

And secondly I don't own it for PS3, I don't own it at all. I'm not on the "whaaaaambulance". I want to own it for 360 but I can't find it anywhere.

Actually. madskillz most people don't research games to that depth, nor should they. By not including a DLC content for one system is obvious signs of "financial agreement" of some sort and that is just plain immoral and shows lack of respect for gamers. I knew about the DLC issue and made sure that when I played the game no support would go to the studio.

Yes, sometimes. This is not one of those cases. It's irrelevant what Bethesda did for Oblivion as this is a different game. Perhaps they wanted a more cinematic ending and for the player to get his/her priorities straight before taking on the boss. Regardless of the reason, this is something that people should be used to by now.

My statement wasn't aimed at you specifically, it was aimed at those who see this as the biggest catastrophe to hit the world since the ice cream shortage of 56." There may or may not have been an ice cream shortage.

A financial agreement is immoral? You do realize that using your logic, every single game is immoral since it was the product of a "financial agreement." How dare Sony not bring Uncharted to the Xbox 360! Curse them and their financial agreements! How dare my boss hire me and not my less qualified competition? Curse the financial agreement we made to exchange a service for money!

Get over it, this is business. And let me tell you this, no public company has your best interest in mind. Sure, they may not want to treat you like douches, but every decision they make is to please stock holders, get good PR, avoid bad PR. Even if Bethesda offered the content free to everyone, it would be to build up their reputation so you'll buy their game in the future. There is nothing wrong with liking a product a company makes or certain people in a company, but liking a company? You do realize their business is taking your money away, regardless of how great a product they make.

While PS3 owners shouldn't be going 'arghh unfair' I do think whether this type of thing is good for the consumer is something to discuss.

And when I say consumers I mean the average joe who doesn't check the internet to see if a game that takes his fancy is going to have paid for DLC on one system not available on another.

IMHO this trend of exclusive DLC is not good for gamers and I mean in all cases, whether the PS3, 360 or Wii versions get it.  It's just a competitive weapon too far in my opinion.  I'd rather developers had to place their bets fully and either be fully exclusive or fully multi-platform.  Same for timed exclusives as well - another dumb competitive idea that I'd like to see the back of.

Maybe it's just my more PC gaming background, but I can't believe console gamers accept this as fair play to the extent they seem to.  It's like buying a game and finding you have extra levels because you have an NVIDA card instead of ATI.

This is true, but i like to also add most average joe dont care about dlc for a game like fallout 3.  It is usually the self proclaim hardcore that really do.

Wow, so Bethesda said months ago that DLC wouldn't be coming to the PS3 version and now people are SHOCKED that DLC in fact still isn't coming to the PS3.