Maybe you should watch the trailer again and actually see the actual water in the game.... Try 1:44 sec and say water is bad looking in skyrim.

Water is bad looking in Skyrim.

Then your not seeing water in Skyrim. I guarantee you thinking of the white water run off and think that is indicative of water in skyrim. Please actually watch the trailer and see the water. Not to mention that water quality is scalable in the PC version, so that's an improvement on the already good looking water.

Then your not seeing water in Skyrim. I guarantee you thinking of the white water run off and think that is indicative of water in skyrim. Please actually watch the trailer and see the water. Not to mention that water quality is scalable in the PC version, so that's an improvement on the already good looking water.

Maybe you should watch the trailer again and actually see the actual water in the game.... Try 1:44 sec and say water is bad looking in skyrim.

Water in Skrim is not indicitave of water in Skyrim?

Except that this is a gameplay trailer. Not a teaser, or a release trailer, something that's actually meant to be indicative of the game - so you can be sure that while there are many placeholders left, they'll have steered well clear of them for the trailer. It's not good marketing to show things that don't work yet.

Water in Skrim is not indicitave of water in Skyrim?

The game will not get better if we sit around talking about how good everything is. Saying something is not perfect is not pretentious or slamming something.

Umm, white water run off where they did the best anyone could do of the foam replication on a raging river is not what the actual water of Skyrim looks like. Take a look at the time stamp I told you to look at and pause it. You'll see the actual water of Skyrim. Not to mention that the water quality will be higher in PC and you can turn on full reflections like the sky and all objects around the water and so on.

Yeah I agree the water looks good. Just the waterfalls that look bad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1qPue2I5qQ

30 seconds in you can see what good water looks like. And although I am sure that in a open world game like Skyrim it would take up to many resources, I also think the water in the video fits the style of graphics in the game. I just don't think water like far cry would fit. (Although it would be cool to see)

...to be this awfully looking, seriously ? man, we're in 2011 that's a real shame !

Georg Zoeller said:
On that topic:

The way game development works is that you often create assets during early development that eventually get replaced.

For example, you need a movement animation in the game as a prerequisite for pretty much anything else involving a character.

These kind of high-dependency assets get roughed in or prototyped as quickly as possible early on to minimize bottlenecks - e.g. once you have basic character movement, you can start doing more specialized work. If you don't, you can't start on that, so they block the rest of development if they're not there.

Usually, all those early assets will get replaced with their final versions later in development - at a time when all the details have been worked out (e.g. the character speeds have been fixed, their special attacks are known, etc.).

This is true for all kinds of assets. Animations. Sounds. Weapons, etc. We've mentioned that almost nothing about the UI is final - again, it's much more important to get a functional and somewhat presentable prototype UI in place to allow development and testing of dependent features than it is to get everything beautiful, right and polished the first time.

In fact, using a 'rough in now - refine later' approach often enables developers to collect internal and customer feedback, work out previously unknown issues and then implement a much stronger final feature (instead of trying to get it all right from paper to screen the first time).

The stage the game is in now, is where things are rapidly coming together, a lot of polish happens on all fronts and where two or three weeks of concentrated work make huge differences in how things appear.

There'll be still quite a few of those kind of functional placeholders (such as the UI) in the game around PAX, but you'll also see a lot of things that used to be placeholder in their final versions.

Anyway, I thought I'd give you some insight on how this works. It's not that we don't listen to feedback on the forums - we do - but sometimes you just have to let the schedule run it's course, even if the community is very vocal in their concern about a specific placeholder feature.

Well, the waterfalls look great. Look at the waterfalls at 1:12. The one that people think is a waterfall is actually just white water rapids and the mesh is supposed to show the foam of a rushing river.

It's hilarious how so many of you are in denial. The water looks bad people, it really does. It looks like it's from a game from 1999.
Why do you not want to admit this?

Yes that waterfall look pretty good too. But it's at a distance so we can't see it in detail...
Still, from distance it looks good.

It also looks good at 1:35 abd 1:37.
But on the "main" waterfall footage everyone is implying to, it looks really bad.
I'm sure it will be fixed though, so no biggie.

...to be this awfully looking, seriously ? man, we're in 2011 that's a real shame !

now this is water

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diEwFnml-Js