The Real Virtuality 3 engine used for ArmA 2 has a rather lovely sandbox environment:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BaLn6ry4R4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olEt30pd6o0&feature=related

Unfortunately you need a super computer to run it at its loveliest. Its lowest settings would melt a console.

Well...I think you miss the point. The point being that you WON'T shell out $300 every year for a new console. In fact, the life of each individual console is longer. And the console companies will lose money? I haven't seen Steve Jobs asking for food stamps.

And it's actually much cheaper and MORE efficient for a company to make a minor modification for an older system then to spend hundreds of millions developing and marketing a separate system. You also don't have to worry about backstock of older consoles because you only produce them in limited quantities. It creates parallel economies as the primary consumers upgrade and sell used versions (at even lower prices) to tertiary consumers. Secondary consumers simply wait until the new edition is out, and buy the previous one.

If you don't believe me, look at the PS3 Slim and the new Xbox. That is EXACTLY what they have done.

The engine supports the graphics. If you just have a mediocre engine, such as Oblivion's Gamebryo, you're not going to be able to get very good graphics and shader effects. So yes, in some respects, the engine DOES matter when considering graphics.

To add to that, the fact of the matter is that technology is converging. Computers and consoles, computers and televisions, computers and cell phones...

Eventually, there will be no way to distinguish a "computer" from a "console". Furthermore, fanning the really devoted fan flames only serves to detract from what we all love--video games.

In reality, consoles have elevated the gaming industry to the point that it is now--generating more revenue than any other entertainment sector ($25B in video games compared to $10B in box office sales for 2010). Without the market accessibility that consoles offer, it's very likely we wouldn't even be talking about Skyrim in it's current incarnation today. Also with consoles come lots of crappy games that TES fans would never play.

PC's (some PC's that is..) on the other hand have the ability to run more detailed and calculation heavy games, but appeal to a much smaller market.

Like most things in life, there are pros and cons to each, but in the end it's all about getting the games we love into the hands of the consumer.

I like to go hiking up in Maine sometimes in the summer, and that first video, the chrome engine, looked extremely realistic to me, if Skyrim looked anything like that...

graphics have never made a game.

I would rather have more worldspace with an older engine than a small world with uber graphics.

Beth could probably make the whole of tamriel using the morrowind engine.

This would excite me more than a super good looking TES game set in only one province.

You're wrong there on two major points:

1) No here has stated that graphics have made a game. But it certainly pays a very big and important role. Would you like to play Skyrim in 2D? Crysis doesn't have the best story ever, but it's pretty darn good. In addition, it also has the best graphics out there. I believe Crysis got a lot of its reputation from its graphics at first. Graphics is what we look at, but it's not all we perceive. Still, our sight is a pretty important thing, is it not? If you deny that, then you should also deny that looks in a person doesn't matter. It's kind of the same thing. Your first impression of a game comes from the graphics, your first impression of a person comes from the looks; assuming you've never heard of any of them before.

2) Beth would far from be able to make whole of Tamriel using the Morrowind engine. Why? I think you fail to realize the very very important fact that a new good engine is not only improving graphics and performance, it also improves the speed of how to do things. New technology often mean new, easier, and faster means of doing things. A new good engine also means many new possibilies with gameplay; therefore, improving it greatly. The result is that they can do a lot more, in a lot less time.

Now now, let's not flame the board here. I'm a PC player but we need to respect the console players too. Yes for both console & PC. No to smug attitudes.

I agree. I'd also like to point out that the video part of video games is pretty important. If the visuals don't matter, why bother having video games instead of board games or text-based games?

this may be off topic but i have a brother in law who is a sight impaired gamer who is also colorblind. the higher quality visuals help him see the game better and with more depth.

visuals ALWAYS matter.

the thing is, with more modern engines you can have both, or if your running a mediocre engine, you have the ability to scale.
just because an engine is new, and can support extremely good graphics does not mean it will cull your pc.
also, with new and better engines comes the ability to customise land scapes like never before.
idk about you, but i would prefer one province of vastly different terrain and landscapes than the whole of tamriel that has been made by making little hills with gamebryo

So if you had to choose between Skyrim and a new Super Mario Bros. game with 8 bit graphics. What would you choose?

Yes, good point. I agree. And respect for the crysis avatar

Dear Bethesda, can we get some screenshots and info soon so people can complain about actual stuff instead of making up things to complain about?

That being said I hadn't seen that first movie (which is a console game that will have come out TWO YEARS before Skyrim, cough cough) so if anyone has any more shiny videos put them up! I love some good eye candy

Skyrim will blow everything we have seen to date out of the water, it'll be 5 years ahead of it's time and it has to be if Bethesda Studios wants to use it's engine for other games and as a point to work with ZeniMax.

Bethesda, make this phrase happen! "But can it run Skyrim?"

hehe, agreed.

haha thanks man.

also, make mudcrabs more prominent so i can say to people "sow, i herd u liek mudcrabz" xD

blow everything out of the water?

i dont think so, look at the awsome graphics for games in 2011!

deus ex,crysis2,gears3,brink,that violent game epic is making, probably the next cod, rage-HECK- even source is going to look sixy

imo, bulletstorm is going to use a whole bunch of pretty light shaders, but pretty basic textures and meshes

Pretty sure hes not flaming console gamers at all, and that your correct to assume that "consumers" means ALL gamers.

Hes simply pointing out that since the current generation of consoles is over 5 years old now, there is only so much developers can do with games developed for them.Thus PC users with new, modern PCs don't have a chance to use them to their full potential. When you have a game like Skyrim, its not going to be some massive graphical leap over Fallout New Vegas simply because there is only so much that can be done on the current generation of consoles, which lag far behind modern PCs in terms of ability. So while developers could make amazing games on current PC's, its not going to happen due to almost all games being cross platform and needing to run well on the weakest link. Its not a dig at those who play on those systems by any means, just simply pointing out that while PCs have great room for advancement when it comes to games... its not going to happen due the out of date nature of current consoles.

As for the videos posted by the OP: I've been seeing graphical renders of "what engines can do" for years now, and most of them STILL look far better then any in-game graphics on the market today. Developers love to crank out renders that make their engine looks great, but when you use it in a game it never looks close to as good. The first video featuring the Call of Juarez engine is a great example. Its the engine that powers CoJ... but CoJ looks NOTHING like that. Not even close in fact. When the next generation of consoles hit, then MAYBE we will see graphics close to that in-game. However its simply not possible with the limited ability of current gen consoles, and since pretty much no major developers are doing PC exclusives these days those graphics will certainly have to wait a few more years.

the xbox's ability probably ends with something like cryengine3/unreal 3+ limited tessellation (the xbox could use it, but not many games have bothered) and thats probably the limit . in around 2 years (assuming everyone doesn't die) the xbox guys will shut up about their deluded idea of having better graphics due to pc guys being all :disguise: and xbox games :batman:


the ps3 will probably last a little longer. :turtle:



i would simply like the engine to be optimised in every way. id also like it if it had some dx11 features, as that would make the game's graphics quite far ahead.
optimisation in...
lighting
ai
the amount of terrain visible
level of detail on distant stuff
particle effects
memory (colour shaders would save a lot)


i would also like improved
water
shaders
cloth physics
good textures, or some way to cheat the effect of good textures
modability

i just want it too look nice, play nice, be deep, and be fun.

is that so much to ask for! xD

Every time I see nvidia showing off tessellation, I get a little sad thinking about Project Offset.

I hope Skyrim has some sort of advanced technology.