This.

I think that pics look good. I don't like the trees that much though. I wish they improve them a bit. (evergreen ones, deciduous ones are beautiful)

And what's up with the carvings on Mammoth's tusks?

If the giant is herding them, it might be a way to mark them as his property or something I guess.

Good point!

No its not outdated, stop whining and nitpicking over small details and a video game in general. Negative people will spread their negativity to others and think only on the negative side of things rather than the positive. Stop worrying about somthing so stupid, there's people dying every second and there's people without anything and yet you spoiled idiotic and negative people cry and whine over somthing so useless and just becuase somthing like Mammoth textures does not meet your expectations or "requirements" you want to make a big deal out of somthing so little. Please for you people tha cry and whine all the time- get a life! :tops:

Why are you all wasting your time studying the images for 360 as if they were for PC?
We have not seen a PC pictures so far and we already complain about the graphic?
Please, stop flaming and wait for a REAL pc screen, i'm waiting with trepidation becouse i'm a PC user and i know that a 360 screen cant do the miracle that I expect.

The picture was fine...

It's very very "comparable" to study the 360 images, because Todd has stated a forced equality between all platforms.
What it looks on the 360, is what it will look on the PC, unless Todd has suddenly changed his mind and decided to give the PC version things so it can be compared to the newer PC games of 2011. So far, Skyrim is way behind graphics-wise on that front.

It will look generally the same, but you can still be confident the PC version will have the option for better shadows, greater view distance, higher resolution textures (Todd actually said this was going to be there), greater resolution in general, and antialiasing. It might also come with an alternative, and possibly better, lighting setting, like how Oblivion had HDR and bloom.

Complaining about the graphics is like complaining about not having enough fingers. YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. There for, all energy put into sooking over it is a total waste of energy.

Tis the same with most anything.

But yet in terms of a open world RPG, in a FPS view it is quite revolutionary graphics. Although for some reason people claim it not to be the best, but you need to take into account the genre, Open World RPG, which means in any case now it won't be to the same graphics quality as Crysis, as Crysis was a slightly open linear game; you also need to take into account the amount of rendering it has to do, Call of Pripyat looked wonderful and had good sized maps, but even then it took up a lot of Hardware processing power, even the maps were separated into two different cells to accommodate for this, Skyrim is keeping it to one map and twice the size of Call of Pripyat's maps. To talk about newer PC games of 2011, Witcher 2 had good graphics but Witcher 2 is a rather linear game. So in all fairness, to an extent I can see where people are coming from with "outdated graphics", we haven't seen the game running properly in motion yet(Besides the cinematic "gameplay" trailer), and so far the screens alone have left me speechless let alone a proper gameplay video.

You're wrong about that you know. It's called customer feedback, and smart businesses pay attention to their customers and don't take them for granted.

At this point, they can't fix it. In fact, they probably never could have made it much better than it is now no matter what they tried, it's not like "good graphics" was just an idea they hadn't thought of. They are limited by the console technology, and would have put as much effort into optimising it and make them work well as they could. Do you really think that Bethesda would have to hear us say "improve the graphics" for it to occur to them?

I think it looks perfectly fine, definatly an improvement over oblivion, if you are expecting the graphics to be crysis level, you are going to have to wait for Elder Scrolls 6 or 7.

Seems like there's just no pleasing some people :shrug:

Better lighting? Console version had HDR as well.
The better lighting that's possible now are extensive and advanced new features, like global illumination.
I wouldn't say better lighting, even possibly, unless Todd says so...
I sure hope though
Nothing what you mentioned otherwise though are going to truly change the visuals. Better, sure. But how much better? Not much at all. To be a lot better, it would require more advanced lighting and more advanced methods of creating depth in models and textures.

Yup, but Cryengine 2-3 are also very capable of rendering large open worlds. You should check out the crysis mod maps there are out there, as well as the other games that are built on Cryengine.
We must also take into account that Cryengine has no cell seperation, while Creation engine has. This matters a lot as well.

There's no point in comparing all the differences there are between games, really? What are we trying to achieve by doing that? We already know games are different. BGS's games are very unique to the fact that they have extremely extensive content. So many dungeons, quests, things to do, people to talk to, etc. There's really no point in comparing stuff like that.

What's more interesting to me is how the "generic player population" will react to the graphics on E3. It will be interesting to see.
The "outdated graphics" talk comes from people who think the game could look better, and wishes, hopes and wants for it. They're being honest and truthful to themselves, and I don't think it's a good idea for one to complain about that.

The graphics standard has risen extremely, and when people first look at a game, they think and say "Omg that looks so really bad... I hope they're joking! ***goes off to look at another game***", they don't say "Oh... yeah that doesn't look very good at all. Looks meh. But I have to keep in mind that it's an open world game that renders this and this many objects and that has 120 dungeons and this many NPCs!"
The first quote is most likely what people would think, if they indeed think it looks outdated or bad.

Speak for yourself, i have next gen hardware, but the developers arnt developing for it yet.

You guys must have a hard time playing anything but Crisis if you think these graphics are bad....seriously. They are 100x better than Oblivion, so stop complaining.

right, Todd said that the platforms will be similar but I dont think Bethesda has difficulty in introducing shadows for each element, greater LOD textures and max resolution textures for pc users, particle effects and better mapping and accurate physic.
I'm not interested in the effects of DX11 saw how beautiful is the witcher 2 with the only use of DX 9.
The elements that Beth can add are many and the final product will be surely better than consolle, at least with regard to the graphics. It's a fact

^ THIS

Hope you're right
But wouldn't dare to call it a fact. I only dare to call something a fact that has been explicitly confirmed by a dev.

I asked a lot of questions like this for the fan interview, specifically if we'll see a graphics improvement before 11/11/11 compared to what we've been seeing already.
I hope those questions gets answered, then we get to know for sure.

Until then, I'm a go with what Todd said about "forced equality for all platforms", sadly :confused:
I personally hope things will improve for all platforms though, and perhaps something extra nice for the PC if it doesn't ruin Bethesda's budget.

I honestly don't know how you can even say that, considering that the picture isn't very high resolution (since it's a standard facebook upload). It's not like it's clear enough to zoom in and look at the bushes well. You should wait until you see it on screen or something to judge its graphics.

Also, I think you're SERIOUSLY overestimating the way games looked "a decade ago". I mean, Halo 1 came out less than a decade ago, and it looked pretty awesome when it first came out.

But this isn't a game breaker to you, is it? The graphics aren't bad at all, I really don't think anyone can claim they are bad by any means.

Does it matter what it is to me?

I think people have a right to have an opinion, no matter what it is (as long as it's not extremely offensive of course and they shout it out in public, kind of like soop's comment at the bottom of page 6, which I reported).
Those who think it looks bad or kind of bad think so for a reason. It's their honest and truthful opinion. Don't complain about that, seriously.

look of the screen 360 and a comment as if they were a PC in my opinion is useless but a medium pc is on average more powerful than a 360.
IF you have a pc that can't hold Skyrim on max setting, than you can take off some of the graph settings and you will play much better but with a "consolle" graphic. It's your choice!
So dont talk about "1000 dollars PC" frustrations. A smart game production house don't leave the consolle and pc version really identical, especially for its flagship product.
Whait for PC screen and then complayn about.