Concerns about the PC version : V - Skyrim

» Tue Nov 10, 2009 10:42 pm

As for your suggestion, I agree completely, with one small difference: They should release the no-DRM patch (at most) a few days after the game is officially hacked.

Sounds good to me.

For that first article, I suspect that both Frank Pierce and the article writer don't know the whole story about DRM. This revelation would put to rest most (if not all) the issues brought up in that article. In this regard, I think the article writer would do well to read the article I have been mentioning in this topic. As for DIVX: According to Wikipedia, DIVX was never meant to compete with DVDs. Rather, it was meant to be an alternative to renting a video.

I agree they should read the Tweak guides article, but there's one issue that is not brought up in it. It's the whole depending on the company for being able to keep on playing thing.

As for the second question, I have just one question: WHY IS HE STILL USING WINDOWS 2000? Surely, by now, the VAST majority of PC users would have migrated to at least Win XP by now. According to http://www.thealexandrian.net/archive/archive2010-09.html#20100930, Win 2000 would fit somewhere in the 6.32% not accounted for in that median. Anyway, I'm also not surprised that Valve would end support, since Microsoft ended support one-and-a-half months before them. I suspect that Valve doesn't want to potentially help expose their users to vulnerabilities that MS was no longer going to patch while also reducing their costs.

He probably uses Windows 2000 for the same reason I use Windows XP: don't fix what ain't broken. Basically XP covers all my needs and while I'll probably get Windows 7 for my next computer I see no reason to upgrade the operating system on my current one.

And I don't blame Steam for ending support, it's a reasonable business move. However, for me it still counts as a reason against online activation. The guy now has to upgrade his operating system if he wants to continue gaming and one day when Steam ends support for Windows XP I may have to do the same (of course my only Steam game is Portal and even that I got when it was free for a few weeks in may). Basically, if I get a Steam game I'm at Valve's mercy as far as playing that game is concerned. Now Valve may be very merciful in this regard but I still don't want to depend on them, especially when it could be avoided. I know I already depend on a lot of companiess for my food, electricity, water, and internet and I really don't want to extend that list any further unless I absolutly must.

That's why disc checsk remain my prefered form of DRM.

» Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:02 pm

I agree they should read the weak guides article, but there's one issue that is not brought up in it. It's the whole depending on the company for being able to keep on playing thing.

Agree. That is the biggest gripe most people have with may of today's DRM systems anyhow.

The dependency on a company to be able to install and/or play the game.

» Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:18 pm

They can use any DRM they want at release as long as they relase a version that requires no more than a simple disc check a month or two afterwards.

Sega released Alpha Protocol back in may/june and a few weeks ago they released a patch that removed the DRM, quite nice of them, and earlier than I expected. If a no-DRM patch is released for a game, I don't really expect it to happen until 2 years after the release or so, when the game been on budget for a while.

» Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:29 pm

They can use any DRM they want at release as long as they relase a version that requires no more than a simple disc check a month or two afterwards.

I hope they release a patch that removes the DRM(if any) and copy protection after a while.

» Tue Nov 10, 2009 9:14 pm

As many people have said already my biggest concern is that it will be a console port and nothing more. Oblivion's UI was a complete mess on PC because of this, and Fallout 3's UI could have used some serious text resizing. I'd just love to see that little extra effort put into my primary platform. Other things bug me such as soft shadows being removed, when they should have been in PC Oblivion, or just Fallout 3's graphics in general. That game needed a TEXTURE PACK DAY ONE.
User interface, inventory management are things that I hope very very much Bethesda takes the time to make right on PC. No reason something so simple to change should be carried directly across all platforms. When it comes to visuals I can remember clearly Oblivion pushing PC's of the time and looking beautiful. Sure it had muddy distant textures, obsessive amounts of pop in and low shadow count but hey it was a 2006 game. For a 2006 game it looked incredible. Fallout 3 on the other hand looked down right poor on launch day. Abysmal textures, low levels of lighting, with very simple and few shaders the game just looked poor even the day it came out. Also Fallout 3 will uses 2 of my CPU cores max.
In 2011 to try and pass off a game, and TES title no less, with any of the problems listed above would be a sever insult to me as fan, and the franchises' history. A game in 2011 needs to use up to 4 CPU cores in a modern PC. Why not ditch the DX9 limitations and go for DX10/11 only title. Adoption rate of both DX10 GPUs and Windows Vista/7 is more than enough. Consoles are a closer match to DX10 than DX9 anyway. At this point for a PC game it just makes sense. With all that extra shading horsepower of modern GPU's plus the tool sets of DX10 and DX11 I expect all modern effects that I see in games now. How about some complicated effects like motion blur, Depth of field, soft particles, richer fuller particle effects (that Skyrim snow storm!), fluid simulation things of that nature. Im sure they could be implemented as options with varying degrees of intensity. I have recently been playing Fallout: New vegas. I know it was an out of house job but its still gamesas tech. A severe problem I have found is the incredibly low levels of geometry from the past 3 titles to use the modified GameBryo. I have seen hills in Fallout that I know are made up of only 3 triangles. I can see the point! Swords or round objects in oblivion look like pipes not round spherical objects. i know a huge game world like that can only push so much geometry but, what about DX11's tessellation? It could be turned on and off by the user. Its adaptive meaning it could be applied to many things in such a sandbox game without worrying of overload. And it would be the singe most visually improving element to add to your engine. Something for mid range and high end DX11 users. Light tessellation on the ground, just enough to get rid those triangle hills! Moderate tessellation on trees, or cities would make them pop with detail. Heavy tessellation of characters with complicated armour sets would really reallly add so much to the game. ALSO! This is a game many of us will play for years, so while some users cant use tessellation now they could later down the road. Geometry is something TES has been needed since Morrowind. Now technology is finally able to give it you. Please use it Bethesda. Also if Morrowind had nform patches then TESV can have tessellation.
I say this not to be a graphics [censored]. I do realize the importance of tech that will work on consoles and a variety of PC's. However TES is very much a game of immersion and exploration. Something that visuals are a very very important part of. Something the series is known for.

» Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:12 pm

As far as DRM goes, Steam is really the lesser of many evils, so as long as I can buy a physical copy of the game, I am okay with it launching from Steam. I just want my collectors edition!

Having an online DRM for a softcopy of a game purchased online, is understandable. Putting that same DRM on the physical offline release of the same game is not. The reason for it being wrong for the physical copy of the game is that the game is then locked into internet access as a necessity for a single player offline game just to install the game and just to run the game for the first time.
If I buy the physical copy of a single player offline game, I should not be locked out of installing or playing the game simply by dent of not having internet access. Forcing Steam on such a game causes that lock out scenario.

As for the game itself, I'm hoping they don't do anything to make it sub-par to the console version. As long as that happens and we get a Construction Set, I don't think there is any other PC specific concerns I have. I'm buying a new desktop for Skyrim because my laptop can barely run Oblivion as it is, so I'm not too worried about the system requirements or anything like that.

I don't see the console versions of the game being sub-par in vanilla form to the PC. That trend has changed so that now the PC version of multi-platform games are sub-par to what they could and ought to be on the PC.
I need to buy a new desktop rig for Skyrim as well.

PS: I know I registered awhile ago, but I think this is my first post here. Hello, fellow fans!

Good to see you joining in the discussions on the forums

Have a Fishy Stick!
[img]http://images.uesp.net//c/c4/Fishystick.jpg[/img]

Jenifur Charne