By that same token, if it was a PC exclusive being made to cater to the typical mid-range gaming PC instead of being forced to adhere to the market-dominating lowest common denominator hardware, it would look a hell of a lot better to begin with.

one thing that would be AWESOME would be if there was a version of the spec shader so that being simply "Shiney" would change to realistic reflections...


would make the game look so more real... especially rainy nights and wet caves

And by that token, it would get 10% of the sales it would get if it goes on all three platforms(based on oblivion sales) and that wouldn't keep Bethesda (or Crytek, couldn't tell which you meant, same difference though) in business for very well.

The PC will have better graphics, and mods, so i don't think some of the PC players here should be complaining.

No. No I wouldn't. I would easily play a game that looks like this if it had more content and artistic appeal. Heck, I still play Daggerfall. Silly argument. <_<

PC gamers sure as hell can complain that the current console generation is holding multiplat titles back. If the Xbox 360 was a flop that died out quickly then the cities would be open. Hell, I think they should be open on the PC anyway since the platform can actually handle it, since it's not constrained to 256MB each of system and video RAM. You can't buy a new PC these days with that little RAM. Hell, a new iPhone has that much RAM.

If consoles are holding back PCs why would Bethesda release Skyrim on PS3 and 360?

I may not be an "artist" but I have had five years of design, plus multiple graphics arts course, as well as a B.Arch from CPSU. Does that count?

edit: Just for those who don't know what CPSU is and try to google it, it's not the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. It's California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo.

Skyrim so far has ONLY shown a dozen screens and a a short trailer that BRIEFLY shows various areas and only shows the dragon scene for any length(which looks great btw). So how can anyone really judge the graphics? Bethesda has really not shown much at all most of the scenes and not significant areas in the screens. Also the Trailer is on Xbox what would it look like on PC with anti aliasing and higher resolution? A LOT different. Bethesda has always pushed the graphic envelope why would they not now?

The witcher, Crysis, and all of those games are out now or have shown a lot of footage.

When Bethesda Finally shows an in depth look at the game with npcs in a scene where you can look and judge one area in detail then and only then can the graphics really be shown. So far what I have scene looks great the character detail is amazing with detailed muscled look and veins in the arm, the textures look great and the draw distance is amazing. Look at the one screen looking up at the dragon perched up high and tell me what is so dated about that.

Until Bethesda shows a longer game play trailer with in depth footage it can in no way be compared to the witcher which shown 15 minutes worth even before it was released.

okay.

http://fallout.gamesas.com/images/art/fallout3screens/screen14B.jpg, running on an Xbox 360. the last game Bethesda made.

http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/542892729584895846/CE0B02F095664E6A5471EE436209B230A209D3F0/, running on a mid-spec laptop at max settings, 1280x720 with 4xAA. no mods.

http://cms.elderscrolls.com/sites/default/files/tes/screenshots/MountainForestPath.jpg, running on an Xbox 360.

until the game is in your hands and you are in a position where you can use Steam Screenshots to post comparison pictures and [censored] and moan about how your increasingly niche platform is getting the shaft, please just stop talking about the graphics.

if you're on a console you've got no right to complain about anything, and if you're on a PC - why the [censored] are you on a PC if you're not planning on filling the [censored] thing with graphics mods? don't even go HURR I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO because the only important thing PC gaming has over console gaming is moddability and if you're a PC gamer and you don't plan on modding then you're willingly crippling your experience and your opinion is therefore tainted and irrelevant.

I'm very happy so far with the way graphics look in the released photos and video.

However, knowing their game's graphics aren't as advanced as other games coming out around the same time, I hope Bethesda takes it as a serious challenge and strives to make Skyrim shine above the rest (in terms of gameplay, story, mechanics, conversations, customization, etc)


edit: might be a couch, chill out man!

Graphics don't make a game. Just look how succesful Minecraft is.

i'm totally chill! these threads always devolve into PC gamers repeating the same tired lines ad nauseam, though. it's gotten silly. we've learned nothing new from any of these threads, but they still keep cropping up.

That's not quite the same thing though. Minecraft's game style is intrinsically linked with it's graphical style.

As soon as the next console line is released for $600 plus dollars (for just the cpu and a controller)... like the PS3 was and everyone with a console will be like "wow the new games look amazing!" .... totally forgetting the trash they slung at PCs and eating it up.

Well I'm pretty sure I've got it modded well, but to be honest I'm using that graphics and sound overhaul, basically a compilation of the best graphics mods, that's ranked #2 At planetelderscrolls, and I've got mge set up to the max for everything. It looks great, but it does not stand up to a modern pc game. The art direction is unique, ands that's pretty much all it has going for it in looks. I do like the water effects though.

Double post.