I can live with Bethesda saying no DLC for the ps3, what I want to raise an eyebrow at are the one who seemingly refuse to believe money changed hands somewhere.

They should release a patch. I don't have PS3, but I support PS3 owners.

This whole dlc thing is absolutely ridiculous they are hurting their consumers and still expecting them to buy their next game which is crap. I dont support dlc's whether they be on ps or xbox. microsoft and sony and bethesda should stop with their silly games and actually listen to their consumers.

All exclusive dlc is paid for no questions asked like the mirrors edge and bioshock ps3 exclusive dlc.

For the record I whole heartedly disagree with DLCs and even more so when anyone pays for them.

Consider this:

Without exclusive content/games on the table: Last gen would have shaken out a lot differently. Console-exclusive games killed the Xbox. The PS2 thrived with exclusive content like GTA, Final Fantasy, God of War, SOCOM, GT and other games. The Xbox was forced to play catch-up the entire time. Add to the fact that the NVidia lawsuit ended the Xbox's life and that's game over. Microsoft learns from their mistakes. They made a console and put it out first this gen. So what the RROD effected a lot of the first, second and even third wave of consoles. So what the Box could eat your disc. So what it wasn't a PS3. So what it doesn't have an HD player built in. What is had was ... a head start. Devs could spend more time with the console and get comfortable with it. They could build a following, and not have to feel obligated to try and design games with the more-than-difficult PS3 framework. And let's just be real - what if you found out MS offered them peanuts for the feature - the ability to play past your death? They likely paid for the content, but Sony could have offered to do the same thing.

Sony, my friend, is living off the past glory of the PS brand. They are like 'We don't pay for extra content.' MS is just laughing its way to the bank. They want to create tons of advantages over last-gen's past champ. They want to give gamers an awesome gaming experience, with stuff the much-more-expensive PS3 can't offer.

In the end, you and others may not feel the extra content is worth it, but a lot of other gamers don't feel the way you do.

Just look at how SONY is becoming more like MS - from their faux achievements - trophies - to adding rumble (which those clowns said was so last gen) to their controllers.

Business is business. You gain market share, you gain a following, you gain profits by being cutthroat. Successful businesses will do what it takes to make customers notice them and buy their product.

Everyone bought their console because they were sure it would have the best lineup. It's the manufacturers' fault if a console doesn't get the extra content and the like.

MS is making sure folks aren't just harping on lower price as the reason for better sales on the 360. Look at software, look at the extra content and expansions, look at the exclusive games. All of that adds a healthy advantage for MS.

I don't care about the DLC a little bit but denying a feature that should have been in the original game? That's unforgivable.

Who said it was supposed to be in the original game? Do you have a link to the game specs that said 'We will only put this feature into the 360/PC version of the game?

In this book and I'll find the link, R* approached MS with an offer - R was offering GTA III and on as timed exclusives - for free - on the original Xbox. MS said they couldn't be associated with the controversial game. R went to Sony with the same offer. Sony accepted.

What would you do if you found out MS got the DLC for free, just for asking? What if it is just that simple?

Lemme dig up that link to the book ...

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3150474

I was thinking about getting this game... hmmm... don't feel like it much now...