Yeah compared to real trees O.o
But for a game (especially after OB >.>) I think they're pretty nice.

I don't think there's enough diversity of trees in Skyrim. For having such a small map, I would think this would allow more work to go into making things less generic, more detailed, less sparse, etc. And this screenshot doesn't look that great to me:

http://cdnstatic.gamesas.com/akqacms/files/tes/screenshots/DragonMountains_wLegal.jpg

What doesn't look appealing is how distant the trees are from each other, how all the trees look alike (opposed to having diverse trees and shapes) and how there doesn't appear to be any foliage between them. It looks terrible quality. Relating to this screenshot, the misting and blurring of the scenery isn't helping create a more 'realistic' feeling world. The dragon looks very appealing and 'realistic' though.

Couldn't help but notice, that picture is of a 1280x720 resolution, a common PC resolution, which indicates that pic was probably taken on the PC.

It's a frozen tundra. There's not much more than sparce pine trees in that kind of region. Except for a deciduous tree here and there. Besides they have the "Fall Forest" and other more temperate zones with different trees.

And about quantity over quality; Sure it may not live up to your expectation but like I said earlier in this thread; it's much better than Oblivion. Open up two tabs and look at a picture of an OB forest, then a picture of a Skyrim forest.
Maybe it's not what you expected but it is a big step in the right direction.

Norway has some pretty epic tree's.

It doesn't look like the frozen tundra region. You can see where the pine trees are on the lower left, it doesn't look like tundra. The ground looks brown/green/yellow. The amount of detail in the shot doesn't look well to me. Like not a lot of 'care/effort/time' went into making it. Perhaps it'll look better though in-game, or it's been improved, or it's just the distance from it for some reason and more foliage detail/diversity will load when closer.

Nope. It's been confirmed that all media released thus far is from the 360. Which strangely enough, 1280x720 is a common resolution for the console.

It could just be a combination of draw distance, contrast, angle of shot..anything really. honestly though I'm not worried at all. Even if the graphics aren't all they're hyped up to be, I have a feeling that'll hold true for a lot of things in Skyrim.

Either way I'm happy with these results
http://screencap.net/f/0ce27146.png
http://screencap.net/f/7fdbb2f3.png

I love the trees...

Up north in the mountains? It's impossible for big trees to be on a mountain side. I don't care is skyrim hasn't got any large trees, if we cannot climb them anyways what is the point

Nope. 1280x720 is 16:9 the widescreen TV ratio. Widescreen computer monitors are 16:10.
Of course I use a TV as my computer monitor, so I have a 16:9 ratio, but my resolution is 1920x1080.
1280x720 means the screens are 720p HD, which svcks as most HD tvs go to 1080p.
But yes the screens are from the xbox. Which is great, because it looks better than most games out there. That means that it'll look even better on the PC.

With dungeons maybe, with villages definitely not.
I think that the real problem was with the lightning (having same amount of light in open field as well as in forest) and in lack of density that you already said.


Hlvr linked to Vurt's trees. They are imo the best looking trees in these games and I hope that they will be easy usable as Skyrim trees.

The screens are worrying, but we haven't seen most of Skyrim, so we only know what diversity we have in these areas we've seen.
Another note, Skyrim is an independent game, probably best not to compare it to Oblivion as they make each game separately (plus, there's a 5 years difference between them, so it doesn't matter).
I do hope for a better diversity in the trees we've already seen in the game. It'll be easy to get lost in a forest with much more trees and tree types than in a forest which is realistic-like in a game.

Sadly 16:10 is a dying AR, though. For example newegg currently has 42 1920x1080 monitors and a whopping 6 1920x1200 monitors. Damn you all, monitor manufacturers :sadvaultboy:

Anyway I'm sure it's been mentioned somewhere in the thread but Beth has said that the trees are using an entirely new system where every branch independently moves depending on the wind, which varies throughout the world, plus there's the dynamic snow system. This is just something that we can't get a grasp on from still pictures. I'm gonna wait for some real gameplay videos to make any conclusion on the trees. Besides, mods can easily add more trees. It's not like consoles can handle true, dense forests.

Was writing a comment and looking for pictures of trees but got a virus or something and had to fix that :brokencomputer:

Anyway, what I was writing before (if I can remember it):
Didn't articles or magazines or something say there would be dense forests? I remember reading about that when I read the magazines and articles and whatnot. So far, no forest I've seen in Skyrim have been "dense". And without dense forests, I doubt we'll get that much lost.

We've seen only a little of Skyrim so far, but one could imagine or wish or hope for a more variety in trees... based on what we've seen so far. I was also hoping to see some really really dense forests before I saw the trailer and the first screenshots, but none of that either so far.

It's because of reasons like this (partly) that I want to see so much more of the environments in Skyrim.

And this is why we'll never agree in this topic!

I'll let you 'tree huggers' get on with your crazy conversation now. Have fun

Well, I would say that you won't see any more trees going closer, but everything else is because of the distant view. The detail they can render at that distance is limited, because it's so far, it would slow down the system dramatically. Just like in Oblivion (though this looks much smoother) all you'll get at distance is trees, maybe some big rocks (maybe) and the ground and a less detailed and non-3D (like grass leaves) texture of whatever's on the ground. It's simply not technologically feasible to do itany other way. But not all the forests will eb the same density anyway. If you look at the trailer, at the end, there is the shot that includes the forest just a smidgen tot he West of that shot, and the trees are somewhat more densely packed.

EDIT: Also, it's not tundra, but I don't think tundra is what you think it is either. Tundra is land where trees can not grow well due to conditions such as temperature or soil quality.

What's wrong with it? Looks completely fine to me. Better than OB trees, imo, and I see progress here.

Stop whining.

I think they look pretty nice in general. The trees you see in that screenshot (http://i56.tinypic.com/1zx2nwm.jpg) are (I think) the exact same ones you see everywhere else, just with dynamic snow in action.
All I could want more is for the snow to accumulate on the trees in that shot. Don't think that's possible though, technically...

The autumn trees are the best though

I talk to the trees, but the trees dont listen to me.

That is a given. Beth can't have more detailed trees in the distance, what they have now is actually great. Thing is, all the trees we've seen so far are pretty much the same, and that's exactly the problem.

In high altitudes, trees grow like that. They grow sparse, and the land is barren... I am born and raised Alaskan. I've spent a lot of time around them.



Also, I think a lot of people are confusion hemlock with pine... they are both conifers.. but in Lake Mountain, Wolf Heals Mace (far left tree is defiantly a hemlock), and Orc Night (to the left of the Orc) all have hemlock as well.

Now if you want a tree that looks the same almost every time... it's hemlock....


My big thing is that they didn't repeat the same meshes over and over and over. There is some difference in where the branches are... YES!!!!!! Huge win for that.

Personally I love where the trees are. Real life isn't HD, and I don't think HD foliage is a good thing. Same with distant landscape. My eyes can't see HD that far away, so I actually don't want my game to do so as well. Heck if they did put HD distant landscape I would turn on depth of field so it blurs a little.

I have seen many types. I have seen (I will now use my incredibly basic understanding of tree names to attempt to name the tree's I have seen.) pine trees, maple trees, dead trees, birch trees, and maybe a few more. I don't know trees very well.

yes we need Canadian trees in the southern parts of skyrim.

lol I thought those ones looks pretty good :shrug: