bad textures,low Polly models, no cloth physics, grass looks : V - Skyrim

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 11:03 am

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/6326/threadq.png

/thread

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:54 am

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/6326/threadq.png

/thread

Is that the fabled picture of Skyrim shown in Gamereactor?

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:18 am

Hopefully it won't require DX11, as I'd rather not have to upgrade my OS.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 7:38 am

Please, everybody, stop being so pessimistic about 19 screenshots of an unfinished game on a new engine that is coming out in 9 months. And the SC's were probably taken 3 months ago. I have extremely high hopes about the game. OP: Seriously, could you come up with something better?
AND: Gameplay > Graphics

Oh my goodness. Just shut up, pessimists.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:39 am

Is that the fabled picture of Skyrim shown in Gamereactor?

No, just a scenic photo I found on google.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:23 pm

Is that the fabled picture of Skyrim shown in Gamereactor?

It's obviously taken from the 360 build of the game. No doubt about it.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 10:35 pm

No, just a scenic photo I found on google.

Darn. I must see that picture.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 5:19 am

Does the OP ever have anything positive to say? Talk about a thorn in this forum's side.

But to answer the question: the graphics look great. But I don't think it would matter whether or not they looked good, would it? I mean... let's see: First, you complain about gameplay - and make several unnecessary threads to do it I might add - and now you complain about graphics when you've stressed previously that gameplay is what you were concerned about. You know, often times one has to be at least partially sacrificed for the other - I'd 1000 times over prefer awesome gameplay over fancy graphics, but then knowing you, this game could look photorealistic and have the most unbelievable gameplay of all time and it wouldn't be enough; and believe me you've demonstrated through all of your redundant posts thus far that what I say is true.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 9:18 pm

They sacrifice certain things to get other things. They want longer views and more detail out far. They also wanted shadows and more interesting lighting. All the things they wanted ment some things you might want didnt happen. As its thier game and not yours ... tough noogies.

They have only 256 megs and the cpus and gpu power of those consoles and nothing more.. so everything you talk about would entail something else going away OR lower frame rates.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:56 pm

Ok, I'll say it for the last time (it won't be the last time, I'll have to say it again in another thread.) These.....are.....screens....of.....the.....consoles. People keep trying to compare the graphics of Oblivion on the PC (and alot of the times with mods graphical mods) to Skyrim console screens. For the console, those screens all look incredible (except the waterfall screen but that's just a bad view and an older version of the game) The PC version is going to look insane, stop killing yourself with worry when there is nothing to worry about....

If you have the GI mag and you look at some of the screens in it like the adventurer in a cave with a staff emitting white light from his left hand or the lighting in a couple of the other screens, that's the 360 and it looks more akin to a PC game. If you put a Crysis 360 screen up to the Skyrim 360 screens, you will see they look pretty damn similar. What does that mean for the PC version? Crysis quality game?

The graphics are great, but not Crysis. The mountains are the best things I have seen in a game though, there awesome.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:37 am

I don't understand people like the OP or threads like this. The graphics look brilliant!!! and I've been playing games for twenty years. I have monster rig and an Xbox, I am just dumbfounded by these kinda threads. Name me one game of a similar type/genre that looks better? Just one

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:24 am

Darn. I must see that picture.

There's a low resolution (and inexplicably upside-down) scan of the image in circulation on a certain forum of a certain TES-related downloads website, but it's so muddy you may as well call it an oil painting.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 7:21 am

I didn't say they weren't. I think the game looks beautiful, but Sleign is assuming far too much based on no evidence. Bethesda said nothing about a PC-exclusive interface or DX11/tesselation support, and to be honest, I really don't think I can imagine a game much more beautiful than Skyrim on any platform. If anyone is expecting Crysis-like graphics or the best graphics ever simply because they're thinking about the PC version and don't have any evidence supporting their thoughts whatsoever, than that person is overhyping the game... and the company has nothing to do with it. Sleign, I respect your opinion and really hope you get what you wish for, but if you're not comfortable with graphics as they've been shown in the screenshots, I don't know what to tell you other than you'll have to get used to the idea that when you play Skyrim, your graphics may not be much more advanced. I'm sure the PC version will have a higher resolution and anti-aliasing, as Todd said it would, but other than that, and based on what Todd said, I'm assuming the PC version will look largely the same. I wouldn't even expect DX10 support.

Yep, I'm assuming... BGS never said anything about PC-exclusive interface.....oh wait, yes they did, in the Toddcast.... Also, I never said anything about it was confirmed that DX11/tessellation was supported in what I said, nice assumption. You have to realize that graphics are transitional. If a game looks just as good or better than a game, say Crysis, on the 360 it stands that it will also look just as good or better on the PC. Like I said, take some time, get a Crysis screen and put it next to the Skyrim screen, they basically are the same graphics quality. Crysis really doesn't have almighty graphics, it's all in the lighting. It's all a lighting trick to block off the flaws in the world. You put the awesome lighting in Crysis in another game and kaboom, you have a great looking game. I don't make my claims out of faith, I make them from evidence, I don't need to "wish". It makes me laugh that I must not know what the graphics of the game are going to be like but you apparently do somehow. DX10 is a staple in games nowadays, it will have at least DX10 support and I'm sure it will have DX11 as well, all of the old TES games were at the forefront of graphics, I don't see why Skyrim would be any different especially already knowing they will be amazing.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 11:32 am

The graphics are great, but not Crysis. The mountains are the best things I have seen in a game though, there awesome.

And you most likely thinking "PC Crysis". You have to think "360 Crysis", which 360 Skyrim's screens are just as good if not slightly better.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:21 am

Quarls texture's look better.

quotes

>>games will look similar on all platforms
>> pc gamers get AA and higher resolution textures

Yep SURE SOUNDS like dx11 support to me. lawl.

"Crysis really doesn't have almighty graphics, it's all in the lighting. It's all a lighting trick to block off the flaws in the world."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shZzYkpl5Nk

Totally crysis looks terrible just look at those textures and the faces of the characters. Yep total svckage and all dx9 lighting is covering it up.

sure.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:32 am

Yep, I'm assuming. BGS never said anything about PC-exclusive interface.....oh wait, yes they did, in the Toddcast....

For the sake of accuracy:

41:02 Will there be an X64 version for PC players? High resolution textures (will they have to be modded in?) Do you have a dedicated group for the PC version?

"We work on it together. The main thing for people to know is our background is PC games. The game is authored here on PCs. That's what we work on. A lot of the team is playing the game on PC all day. We do want the platforms to each have a really, really high level of fidelity. I personally play a lot on the Xbox. It tends to be my preferred platform. We do a lot of graphics development still FIRST on the Xbox, just because it's smoother. And then a lot of that stuff does go over to the PC. We tend to do as much as we can as the project goes on, because we want to support as wide a range as possible. We also tend to do that stuff late, because right now we want to work on the main game and how it plays and getting the graphics fast everywhere, and then as the project gets closer to release we start supporting all those other things. You'll definitely be able to run the PC on a much higher resolution. All of our games that we've done so far - Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout - the PC versions have higher res textures they ship with by default. A lot of times you don't notice that, because when you play a console game you're sitting six to ten feet away from the screen. Whereas on the PC, you're sitting a foot, two feet away from the screen. Those kinds of differences in texture resolution, you don't notice unless you're looking at two screenshots on a computer and flipping between them. We are gonna support that stuff. I can't say how far. But the same thing with the interface. We do a lot of PC interface stuff. There are uniquenesses [sic] to how we handle it on the PC."

http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1164509-edited-transcript-of-the-gi-podcast/

That's pretty vague, really. "Uniquenesses" to the PC could mean anything from a few minor tweaks to a massively different interface.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:28 am

I don't understand people like the OP or threads like this. The graphics look brilliant!!! and I've been playing games for twenty years. I have monster rig and an Xbox, I am just dumbfounded by these kinda threads. Name me one game of a similar type/genre that looks better? Just one

The witcher 2 assassins of kings; made on a much smaller budget mind you.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:53 am

I think they look ok, will probably look better on pc.

As for animated hair and cloths, sure it would be nice as long as they have an OK animator.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:10 am

Quarls texture's look better.

quotes

>>games will look similar on all platforms
>> pc gamers get AA and higher resolution textures

Yep SURE SOUNDS like dx11 support to me. lawl.

"Crysis really doesn't have almighty graphics, it's all in the lighting. It's all a lighting trick to block off the flaws in the world."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shZzYkpl5Nk

Totally crysis looks terrible just look at those textures and the faces of the characters. Yep total svckage and all dx9 lighting is covering it up.

sure.

And you just made like 3 of my cases. You are trying to compare modded Oblivion graphics to a 360 game screen of Skyrim, yep, not unfair at all...

Todd already said in the toddcast that the PC will have improved graphics over the 360 by alot, it's sort've inherent with all games, so don't "lawl" someone when you don't know what your talking about.

That video shows the PC version and the graphics look average and the light does cover the flaws in the game, showing me a video of a game I've played several times on my gaming rig which has the best hardware you can get in a commercial gaming rig doesn't change a thing, sorry.

That's pretty vague, really. "Uniquenesses" to the PC could mean anything from a few minor tweaks to a massively different interface.

Your making too much out of "PC-exclusive". That means that it will only be on the PC which, it will. The consoles won't have the controls that the PC UI won't.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:24 pm

I don't understand people like the OP or threads like this. The graphics look brilliant!!! and I've been playing games for twenty years. I have monster rig and an Xbox, I am just dumbfounded by these kinda threads. Name me one game of a similar type/genre that looks better? Just one

none are close, but there are few open world rpgs(sadly because thats really all I am interested in).

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 11:18 am

Todd already said in the toddcast that the PC will have improved graphics over the 360 by alot,

Only if by "alot" you mean: higher screen resolution and higher texture resolutions. Todd didn't confirm anything apart from that in the podcast.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:37 pm

This is one of the most ridiculous threads I've ever seen made in the Skyrim forum. :thumbsup:

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 11:43 am

Yep, I'm assuming. BGS never said anything about PC-exclusive interface.....oh wait, yes they did, in the Toddcast.... Also, I never said anything about it was confirmed that DX11/tessellation was supported in what I said, nice assumption. You have to realize that graphics are transitional. If a game looks just as good or better than a game, say Crysis, on the 360 it stands that it will also look just as good or better on the PC. Like I said, take some time, get a Crysis screen and put it next to the Skyrim screen, they basically are the same graphics quality. Crysis really doesn't have almighty graphics, it's all in the lighting. It's all a lighting trick to block off the flaws in the world. You put the awesome lighting in Crysis in another game and kaboom, you have a great looking game. I don't make my claims out of faith, I make them from evidence, I don't need to "wish". It makes me laugh that I must not know what the graphics of the game are going to be like but you apparently do somehow.

Why are you being so hostile towards me? I'm detecting a strong theme of "shut up" from your post. I'm not trying to be hostile, belittle you, or yell. I just don't see any evidence for what you are assuming. Those are some very strong assumptions. Todd mentioned higher resolution and anti-aliasing, but claimed they were aiming to make each version look largely the same and conveniently left out any mention of DX11 or even DX10 support. There's evidence to the contrary of what you're expecting. I'm not trying to say anything back, but for my own reference, please, let me know where in the podcast that was stated about the interface. I don't recall anything about a PC-exclusive interface and Oblivion sure didn't have one nor did Fallout 3. They didn't even make a separate, console-exclusive one for Morrowind when they ported it over to the Xbox. You're assuming things without a shred of evidence supporting them, hence you're, in a sense, wishing or hoping for them.

I'm not a pessimist. I've already stated that I think it looks beautiful, but not Crysis beautiful (to get an open world RPG's graphics on par with Crysis' in a multiplatform release on the same hardware would require the programmers to be programming gods/goddesses). I've also done nothing but praised much of what I've heard. I'm fully expecting my new favorite game based on my love for past titles and, in particular, the very last one. The new leveling system sounds awesome, the graphics appear to be solid, and I'm just in love with this game and fully trusting of Bethesda, so this is hardly pessimism. However, there are limitations to what can be done and, well, there are limitations and little from Bethesda supporting the inclusion of what you seem to expect.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 3:20 am

You're really setting yourself up for disappointment.

People who think the game is going to look so much better when it goes gold are defenitly setting them selfs up for disappointment. Screen from OB 10 months out did not look much different than at release.

Btw, I think the game already looks great, the art direction is much better than OB.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 5:13 am

think for a second.

why would they show pics from the 360 platform? it is technically the weakest platform- so isnt it strange that they would pick that to do the screenshots? if you were a dev marketer and you had one platform with graphics far superior to the others would you not pick that?

actually alot of devs do this. we didn't see pc version of crysis2, me, deadspace, and dao2 for a long time. it was mostly low quality console version shots for several months.

not sure why. maybe they don't want the console user base to feel fooled.